Skip to content

Conversation

@SidestreamColdMelon
Copy link
Contributor

@SidestreamColdMelon SidestreamColdMelon commented Oct 21, 2025

This PR:

* IF Prime Agent spell is provided
* [ ] Handover message matches `XXX spell YYYY-MM-DD deployed to 0x… with hash 0x…, direct execution: yes / no` template
* [ ] IF `direct execution` is `no`
* [ ] The spell is plotted using `StarGuardLike(XXX_STARGUARD).plot(XXX_SPELL, XXX_SPELL_HASH)`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please, update the name here as well.

- [ ] The spell exposes view-only interface `function isExecutable() external view returns (bool result)`.
- [ ] `isExecutable` either simply returns `true` or implements additional logic communicated via the relevant forum post (e.g.: by describing "earliest launch date" or "office hours" logic, etc).
- [ ] The test ensures the spell is executable before expiration (i.e. `isExecutable` outputs `true` before `StarGuard.maxDelay()` is passed).
- [ ] Third-party actors can not take advantage of the fact that Spell will be executed in a later block than the Core spell, otherwise suggest `direct execution`.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [ ] Third-party actors can not take advantage of the fact that Spell will be executed in a later block than the Core spell, otherwise suggest `direct execution`.
- [ ] Third-party actors cannot take advantage of the fact that Spell will be executed in a later block than the Core spell, otherwise suggest `direct execution`.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have read this rule:

Don’t use can not when you mean cannot. The only time you’re likely to see can not written as separate words is when the word “can” happens to precede some other phrase that happens to start with “not”

But I am not a native speaker so I might be wrong.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think both forms are acceptable, but as there are plenty of existing occasions in the checklists, I will keep it as is (if you don't mind)

### StarGuard execution
- [ ] IF a [StarGuard module](https://github.com/sky-ecosystem/star-guard) is onboarded for this Star, the following additional checks are done:
- [ ] The spell exposes view-only interface `function isExecutable() external view returns (bool result)`.
- [ ] `isExecutable` either simply returns `true` or implements additional logic communicated via the relevant forum post (e.g.: by describing "earliest launch date" or "office hours" logic, etc).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [ ] `isExecutable` either simply returns `true` or implements additional logic communicated via the relevant forum post (e.g.: by describing "earliest launch date" or "office hours" logic, etc).
- [ ] `isExecutable` either simply returns `true` or implements additional logic communicated via the relevant forum post (e.g., by describing "earliest launch date" or "office hours" logic, etc).

- [ ] Matches valid external source (previously approved forum post, external docs, etc).

### StarGuard execution
- [ ] IF a [StarGuard module](https://github.com/sky-ecosystem/star-guard) is onboarded for this Star, the following additional checks are done:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [ ] IF a [StarGuard module](https://github.com/sky-ecosystem/star-guard) is onboarded for this Star, the following additional checks are done:
- [ ] IF a [StarGuard module](https://github.com/sky-ecosystem/star-guard) is onboarded for this Prime Agent, the following additional checks are done:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants