hermes - 💡(How to fix) Fix [RFC] opencode skill: 3 governance gaps in autonomous coding orchestration

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…

Fix Action

Fix / Workaround

Suggested mitigation: Explicit blocklist for files matching **/.env*, **/.git/**, **/secrets/** before OpenCode's context window is populated.

Code Example

# Capture changed files
CHANGED=$(git diff main..HEAD --name-only)

# 1. Static analysis on changed files
# 2. Behavioral review: edge cases, security implications, contract violations
# 3. Build + test gate
# Verdict: PASS | PENDING | BLOCKED

---

hermes.opencode (generates code)
  → post-generation verification pass
  → hermes.github-code-review (inline comments with findings)
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

The skills/autonomous-ai-agents/opencode/SKILL.md orchestrates OpenCode as an autonomous coding worker. A review of the skill found 3 gaps where a post-generation verification step would improve correctness and security.

Gap 1 (high): No pre-execution plan validation

OpenCode operates directly on workdir without a review step before file mutations. Destructive operations, dependency injections, or unintended broad rewrites could land before any human sees them. A plan review gate before git commit would catch this.

Concrete scenario: OpenCode receives "refactor the auth module" and rewrites 40 files. Without a pre-commit review, the first signal is a broken build.

Gap 2 (medium): No convergence verification before marking success

Background OpenCode sessions can exit with a success status while leaving the codebase in broken state (type errors, failing tests, lint regressions). The skill's polling mechanism doesn't enforce a green build before marking the task complete.

Suggested addition: After OpenCode exits, run tsc --noEmit && bun test (or equivalent) and fail the task if these don't pass — rather than relying on the process exit code alone.

Gap 3 (high): Secret ingestion risk

OpenCode may ingest .env files, .git history, or internal configuration to contextualize tasks, potentially exposing credentials to external LLM providers. No current guardrail on what files enter the prompt context.

Suggested mitigation: Explicit blocklist for files matching **/.env*, **/.git/**, **/secrets/** before OpenCode's context window is populated.

Proposed post-generation verification hook (no runtime adapter needed)

After OpenCode completes, before merge to main:

# Capture changed files
CHANGED=$(git diff main..HEAD --name-only)

# 1. Static analysis on changed files
# 2. Behavioral review: edge cases, security implications, contract violations
# 3. Build + test gate
# Verdict: PASS | PENDING | BLOCKED

The verification layer reads files OpenCode writes — the protocol is the interface. No API integration with OpenCode needed.

Full chain:

hermes.opencode (generates code)
  → post-generation verification pass
  → hermes.github-code-review (inline comments with findings)

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING

hermes - 💡(How to fix) Fix [RFC] opencode skill: 3 governance gaps in autonomous coding orchestration