From 5af7e45118c41731cd0ad204007f27d1f130dc96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Cal Corum Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 15:57:09 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] store: PR Reviewer: Scheduled Poller over Webhook Trigger --- ...uled-poller-over-webhook-trigger-231645.md | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) create mode 100644 graph/decisions/pr-reviewer-scheduled-poller-over-webhook-trigger-231645.md diff --git a/graph/decisions/pr-reviewer-scheduled-poller-over-webhook-trigger-231645.md b/graph/decisions/pr-reviewer-scheduled-poller-over-webhook-trigger-231645.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..0632728adfa --- /dev/null +++ b/graph/decisions/pr-reviewer-scheduled-poller-over-webhook-trigger-231645.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +id: 231645fd-79ae-4e01-b251-7720c16dc998 +type: decision +title: "PR Reviewer: Scheduled Poller over Webhook Trigger" +tags: [pr-reviewer, claude-scheduled, architecture, decision, gitea, automation] +importance: 0.7 +confidence: 0.8 +created: "2026-03-02T21:57:09.031172+00:00" +updated: "2026-03-02T21:57:09.031172+00:00" +--- + +# PR Reviewer: Scheduled Poller over Webhook Trigger + +## Decision +Chose **Approach C (scheduled poller)** over webhook-triggered (Approach A) or CI-only API call (Approach B). + +## Rationale +- Reuses 90% of existing claude-scheduled infrastructure + - systemd timers + - Runner patterns + - MCP configs + - Discord notifications +- No webhook receiver server needed +- Full local environment available with MCP servers and cognitive memory + +## Trade-offs +- **Latency**: Up to 30 minutes before review appears after PR is opened +- Acceptable for current workflow — we are not a high-velocity team + +## Alternatives Considered +- **Approach A (webhook)**: Would require a persistent webhook receiver service. More complex infra. +- **Approach B (CI API call)**: Would run inside Gitea Actions, losing access to local MCP servers and cognitive memory.