-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Phase 4: Review status indicators and update functionality #5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Implement comprehensive review management system with: Backend: - New API endpoint `/api/reviews/prompt/<version>` to load existing reviews - Groups reviews by case_id for efficient frontend consumption Frontend: - Visual status indicators: green border + ✅ for reviewed, red border + ⚪ for pending - Automatic form pre-population with existing review data - Dynamic button text: "Save Review" vs "Update Review" based on status - Progress tracking with animated bar showing "X/Y cases reviewed (Z%)" - Real-time status updates when reviews are saved/updated - State management for existing reviews and progress counters This creates a professional review interface that handles the full lifecycle of human review management, making it easy to track progress and update existing reviews without losing work. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
- Mark human review integration and QoL improvements as completed in claude_explain.md - Update WHATS_NEXT.md to show all 4 phases of review interface work as done - Enhance README.md Human Review Workflow section with comprehensive feature list - Remove completed items from TODO lists and accurately reflect current capabilities Documentation now reflects the evolution from basic web form to professional review management system with status indicators, progress tracking, and comprehensive user experience improvements.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull Request Overview
This PR implements review status indicators, progress tracking, and update functionality for the prompt testing framework by enhancing both the backend API and the frontend interface.
- Adds a new API endpoint to fetch reviews filtered by prompt version.
- Introduces CSS styling and JavaScript logic for review status indicators and dynamic progress tracking.
- Updates documentation and README to reflect the new review management features.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
Show a summary per file
File | Description |
---|---|
prompt_testing/web_review.py | Added API route for retrieving reviews by prompt version. |
prompt_testing/templates/review.html | Integrated visual status indicators, progress tracking, and update functionality. |
prompt_testing/WHATS_NEXT.md | Updated next steps documentation to include new features. |
prompt_testing/README.md | Enhanced feature list to detail the new web review interface changes. |
claude_explain.md | Revised explanations to describe the enhancements in review management. |
prompt_testing/web_review.py
Outdated
# Group reviews by case_id for easier frontend consumption | ||
reviews_by_case = {} | ||
for review in reviews: | ||
reviews_by_case[review.case_id] = review.__dict__ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If there is a possibility of multiple reviews per case, this assignment will overwrite previous reviews. Consider grouping reviews per case in an array to avoid data loss.
reviews_by_case[review.case_id] = review.__dict__ | |
if review.case_id not in reviews_by_case: | |
reviews_by_case[review.case_id] = [] | |
reviews_by_case[review.case_id].append(review.__dict__) |
Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
Address Copilot feedback about line 238 direct assignment vs arrays. Added comprehensive comment explaining this is an intentional design decision for single-reviewer prompt iteration workflows rather than multi-reviewer research. The design optimizes for: - Simple binary reviewed/not-reviewed state - Clear completion tracking without consensus complexity - UI focused on iteration speed over comprehensive evaluation - JSONL storage still preserves all reviews for future evolution
Summary
Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code