Traigent ci safety gate

CI Safety Gate

When to Use

Use this skill when the user asks:

• "add safety constraints"
• "gate the optimized config"
• "prevent regressions in CI"
• "cost/latency budget"
• "GitHub Actions for my agent"

<!-- PROTECTED -->

The gate should fail closed: missing metrics, NaN metrics, parse failures, rejected promotion decisions, and budget breaches should stop promotion.

<!-- /PROTECTED -->

In-Run Safety Constraints (Not Yet Available)

safety_constraints=[...] on @traigent.optimize is planned to filter unsafe trial results during optimization, but the installed SDK does not implement it yet. Passing any non-empty value raises NotImplementedError at decoration time (verified against SDK 0.18.x): "safety_constraints are not yet implemented. Statistical chance-constraints are on the roadmap — track progress at https://github.com/Traigent/traigent-smartopt/issues/26". The SafetyConstraint, CompoundSafetyConstraint, MetricKeyMetric, CallableMetric, and SafetyThreshold classes exist and import cleanly, but do not pass any of them via safety_constraints= today.

Do not teach a safety_constraints=[...] code sample as runnable. For gating today, use the two mechanisms this skill already covers that ARE implemented:

• PromotionGate (below) to statistically compare a candidate config against the incumbent before promoting it.
• TVL spec validation (python -m traigent.tvl ... --strict) to enforce configuration-space and objective constraints ahead of a run.

Keep safety semantics simple, explicit, and reviewable regardless of mechanism: schema validity, refusal policy, citation checks, cost caps, and latency caps.

Promotion Gate

Use PromotionGate to compare a candidate config against the incumbent on the same holdout. evaluate returns a decision with decision equal to promote, reject, or no_decision.

from traigent.tvl.models import PromotionPolicy
from traigent.tvl.promotion_gate import ObjectiveSpec, PromotionGate

policy = PromotionPolicy(
    dominance="epsilon_pareto",
    alpha=0.05,
    min_effect={"accuracy": 0.01, "latency_ms": 25.0},
    adjust="BH",
)
objectives = [
    ObjectiveSpec(name="accuracy", direction="maximize"),
    ObjectiveSpec(name="latency_ms", direction="minimize"),
]

gate = PromotionGate(policy=policy, objectives=objectives)
decision = gate.evaluate(
    incumbent_metrics={"accuracy": [0.81, 0.82, 0.80], "latency_ms": [880, 900, 870]},
    candidate_metrics={"accuracy": [0.84, 0.85, 0.83], "latency_ms": [910, 905, 920]},
)
print(decision.decision, decision.reason)

A statistical gate can tell you whether the candidate has enough evidence to promote, reject, or remain undecided on the measured evaluation dataset. It cannot prove universal safety, discover unmeasured regressions, or rescue a biased evaluator.

Validate TVL specs in CI before running the gate:

python -m traigent.tvl path/to/promotion-gate.tvl --strict

Applying the Winning Config

This skill covers the gate in the export -> gate -> apply flow. For the full end-to-end flow, see traigent section "4. Export a candidate, gate, then apply". Keep promotion staged: export the winning config as a candidate, run the holdout/promotion gate, then apply only after the gate passes and the user approves.

# Export the winning config as a CANDIDATE artifact for review/gating
my_function.export_config("candidate_config.json")

# After the holdout/promotion gate passes and the user approves:
my_function.apply_best_config(results)
answer = my_function("What is Python?")

The Two CI Checks

SAFETY: run a holdout regression check against a pinned baseline config.

• Pull request job: run offline/mock under TRAIGENT_OFFLINE_MODE=true to verify wiring, script shape, and fail-closed behavior without spending.
• Scheduled job: run the real holdout evaluation under TRAIGENT_RUN_COST_LIMIT with account credentials and compare candidate vs incumbent.

Any CI workflow that executes optimize() or optimize_sync() in local/offline mode, including mock/offline wiring checks, must set TRAIGENT_RUN_APPROVED=1. This is the SDK's explicit approval signal for approved CI runs, not a bypass; cloud-mode runs are unaffected.

EFFICIENCY: assert results.total_cost and latency metrics remain within budget. Fail the job on cost breach, latency breach, rejected promotion, missing metrics, parse failures, or safety regression.

Key Hygiene in CI

CI logs are shareable artifacts — visible to every collaborator with repo access and often retained for months. The same leaks apply here, at a larger blast radius, and have been observed across multiple coding-agent CLI families (Codex, Claude, Gemini) authoring the workflow — this is a universal agent failure mode, not one CLI's quirk:

• Never print, echo, or log a key value in a workflow step. echo $TRAIGENT_API_KEY, an env/printenv dump, and set -x wrapped around a key-touching step all write the raw secret into the CI run log.
• Reference keys only by env-var name, wired ${{ secrets.* }} → job/step env: — never inline a literal key value in the workflow YAML or a script.
• GitHub Actions masks only registered secrets. It redacts values it was told about via secrets:; a value reconstructed, echoed through an intermediate variable, or printed by set -x before the secret is registered can bypass masking — so the rules above still apply.

Minimal GitHub Actions shape:

name: Traigent safety gate

on:
  pull_request:

jobs:
  # PR job: offline wiring check only — static env, zero spend. The paid
  # nightly job is a separate job with its own static env; see
  # references/gate-workflow.md for the full two-job workflow.
  safety-gate:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    env:
      TRAIGENT_RUN_COST_LIMIT: "0.00"
      TRAIGENT_OFFLINE_MODE: "true"
      TRAIGENT_RUN_APPROVED: "1"
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - uses: actions/setup-python@v5
        with:
          python-version: "3.12"
      - run: pip install -r requirements.txt
      - run: python -m traigent.tvl tvl/ --strict
      - run: python scripts/run_holdout_eval.py --mode mock --config configs/baseline.json --output .gate/incumbent.json
      - run: python scripts/run_holdout_eval.py --mode mock --config configs/candidate.json --output .gate/candidate.json
      - run: python scripts/traigent_gate.py --incumbent .gate/incumbent.json --candidate .gate/candidate.json --max-cost 0.01 --max-latency-ms 1200

For a full copy-paste workflow and gate script, read references/gate-workflow.md.

Planned: a traigent ci command group will package these checks; the manual recipe stays valid.

Claim Scope

Gate decisions are statistical decisions on the measured evaluation dataset and configured objectives, not broad safety claims. Re-run the gate when the evaluation dataset, evaluator, baseline config, candidate config, objective weights, provider, or budget changes.

See Also

• traigent-optimize-run - cost limits, algorithms, and stop reasons.
• traigent-analyze-results - result fields, best config, cost, and stop-reason interpretation.
• traigent-analyze-guidance - decide what to change after a failed or inconclusive gate.

<!-- Reserved: managed longitudinal-guidance region. Step-level edits must not write here. --> <!-- SLOW_UPDATE --> <!-- /SLOW_UPDATE --> <!-- INTERACTION_POLICY v1 (synced — do not edit inline; edit docs/shared/interaction-policy.v1.md) -->

Traigent Interaction Policy

Track an interaction profile and adapt to it. Persona (stable): control=delegate|guided|inspect, expertise=se|ds|unknown. Mood (this session): pace=execute|balanced|explore. Default when unknown: guided,se,balanced. Infer from explicit user statements first, then recent behavior; an explicit correction wins immediately. Never store or send this profile anywhere by default.

Fetch the live profile (when available)

At session or skill start, if a configured Traigent client is available, seed the profile from the backend with the skill name:

policy = None
try: policy = await client.get_interaction_policy(skill="<this skill>")
except Exception: pass

Treat the returned profile as the STARTING seed: its control/expertise/pace axes plus question_budget, options_max, and jargon_level replace the static defaults below. Explicit user corrections in-conversation ALWAYS override the seed. If the call is unavailable or fallback_policy="static_v1", simply use the static defaults below; the SDK already fails soft.

• Always be concise.
• Match terminology to expertise. For se: plain engineering words; define each Traigent or statistics term once in plain language (no Bayesian / variance-decomposition / Pareto jargon unless asked). For ds: compact optimization and statistical terms are fine.
• Presenting options: show at most 3, mark exactly one Recommended, and give one short persona-appropriate trade-off per option.
• Autonomy. For delegate or execute: pick the recommended reversible action and proceed, asking only at hard gates. For guided: offer options with a recommendation at the key decisions. For inspect or explore: give brief rationale or evidence before asking, and ask before branch choices.
• Hard gates — always confirm regardless of persona: paid or provider model calls, sending data or private content off the machine, destructive edits, decisions the Traigent service is meant to return, and any missing fact the step truly requires.
• Always end by recommending the next Traigent skill or action to take.
• Never weaken Traigent safety: dry-run before any paid run; get explicit approval before real cost or before any data leaves the machine; treat service-returned plans and next steps as authoritative. Never put the persona profile or any private content into telemetry, run metadata, experiment names, logs, or provenance files.

<!-- /INTERACTION_POLICY v1 -->