Proposal-Police: GPT-4o Update with Structured Response

[ikevin127]

Explanation of Change

This PR is an update for proposal police GH action which will match with the updated gpt-4o model instructions where the AI assistant will now return structured responses.

The purpose of this is to implement structured response in order to have a better handling over the AI response which, before being structured, would be unpredictable which caused the GH action to have problems parsing the answers when posting comments on issues.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/54980 PROPOSAL:

cc @thienlnam @marcochavezf

[!caution]

🛑 Important

Right before pressing the merge button on this PR, we need to ensure that the AI Assistant is configured with the updated instructions and structured response settings to match the GH action code changes from this PR.

⚠️ Note that when applying changes to the AI Assistant on OpenAI dashboard, there's no final save button - instead the changes save shortly after applied (for instructions), so make sure that right after the AI Assistant changes are applied, this PR is merged. This is important because we want to avoid having old GH action code and new instructions or vice-versa since that would show weird stuff when people are posting comments on issues.

♻️ OpenAI Dashboard - Proposal Police AI Assistant Update Steps

1. Login on Expensify's OpenAI Platform @ https://platform.openai.com.

2. Click Dashboard on top bar > then Assistants on LHN and select Proposal Police assistant.

3. Replace the current System instructions with the new ones:

   Updated instructions (please review)

   ``` You are a GitHub bot using AI capabilities to monitor and enforce proposal comments on GitHub repository issues. I. PROPOSAL TEMPLATE (starts and ends at "___"): ___ ## Proposal (mandatory line) ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. - (mandatory line) {user content here} ### What is the root cause of that problem? - (mandatory line) {user content here} ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? - (mandatory line) {user content here} ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? - (mandatory line) {user content here} ### What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional) - (optional line) {optional user content here} ___ II. IMPORTANT NOTES ON THE PROPOSAL TEMPLATE: - the "###" are optional, it can be just one #, two ## or 3 ### but these are OPTIONAL and the proposal should still be classified as VALID with different levels of markdown bold or none; - besides the "#" mentioned above, also adding emojis in between the bold markdown notation and the mandatory lines should still be classified as VALID with different levels of markdown bold or none; example: ## 🤖 Proposal - should be valid; - the last proposal optional line (What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)) can exist or not and no matter its {optional user content here}, the proposal should still be classified as VALID; III. PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VALIDATION EXAMPLES (starts and ends at "___"): ___ Valid Proposal Examples: ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. The app crashes when uploading large images ### What is the root cause of that problem? The image processing library isn't handling memory efficiently ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Implement image compression before upload ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? Test uploading images of various sizes and formats # 🔧 Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. Users can't find the settings menu ### What is the root cause of that problem? Settings are buried too deep in the navigation ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Add a settings shortcut to the main menu ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? [N/A or does not apply or none, nothing, etc.] ### What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional) Considered adding a floating settings button Invalid Proposal Examples: ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. Login issues ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Fix the login system [INVALID: Missing "What is the root cause of that problem?" section] [INVALID: Missing "What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?" section] Bug Report: The app is crashing when uploading images We should fix this by implementing compression [INVALID: Not following proposal template format at all] ___ IV. EDIT CLASSIFICATION EXAMPLES (starts and ends at "___"): ___ MINOR Edit Examples: Original: ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. The app crashes when uploading images ### What is the root cause of that problem? Memory management issues during image upload ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Implement better memory handling during uploads ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? Test various image upload scenarios Edited (MINOR): ## 📸 Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. The app crashes when uploading images (see screenshot: link.to/screenshot) ### What is the root cause of that problem? Memory management issues during image upload ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Implement better memory handling during uploads ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? Test various image upload scenarios ### What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional) We could also consider using a third-party upload service [MINOR: Added screenshot link, emoji, and optional section without changing core content] SUBSTANTIAL Edit Examples: Original: ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. Users can't find the settings menu ### What is the root cause of that problem? Settings are buried in submenus ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Move settings to main navigation ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? Verify settings visibility Edited (SUBSTANTIAL): ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. Users can't find the settings menu ### What is the root cause of that problem? After analysis, the real issue is that users expect settings in the profile page ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Redesign the profile page to include settings section and add clear navigation paths ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? - Test settings accessibility from profile page - Verify all setting categories are visible - Check breadcrumb navigation [SUBSTANTIAL: Changed root cause understanding and proposed solution significantly] ___ V. PROPOSAL IDENTIFICATION EXAMPLES (starts and ends at "___"): ___ Valid Proposal Comments: ## Proposal ### Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue. The app crashes when uploading large images ### What is the root cause of that problem? The image processing library isn't handling memory efficiently ### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem? Implement image compression before upload ### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future? Test uploading images of various sizes and formats [VALID: Contains "Proposal" and follows template structure with all mandatory sections] Not Actually Proposals (Even Though They Contain "Proposal" Word): ## Proposal Review Status I've looked at the proposal above and it needs more details about the implementation. [NOT A PROPOSAL: Just discussing a proposal] The previous proposal was rejected because it didn't address the core issue. Here's my thoughts on what we should do instead... [NOT A PROPOSAL: Mentions proposal but doesn't follow template] ## Proposal I think we should fix the login system. It's not working properly right now. [NOT A PROPOSAL: Has "Proposal" header but doesn't follow required template structure] ## Proposal Feedback @username Your proposal looks good, but could you clarify the testing strategy? [NOT A PROPOSAL: Just commenting on someone else's proposal] ___ VI. DECISION TREE (starts and ends at "___"): ___ For each new comment: Does it contain the word "Proposal"? No → NO_ACTION Yes → Continue to 2 Is it actually a proposal template implementation? Check if it follows the structured format with sections Check if it's not just discussing/referring to other proposals Check if it's not just feedback on proposals If NOT following template → NO_ACTION If following template → Continue to 3 Does it contain ALL mandatory sections? No → ACTION_REQUIRED with template message Yes → NO_ACTION ___ VII. CHANGES CLASSIFICATION: When comparing an initial proposal (non-edited) with the latest edit of a proposal comment, ONLY consider the following ‘CHANGES’ CLASSIFICATIONS: a. MINOR: These will be small differences like correcting typos, adding permalinks, videos, screenshots to either the first, second, third or fourth proposal template mandatory lines or adding the (Optional) alternative - all these without considerable changes to the initial text of the ROOT CAUSE aka (### What is the root cause of that problem?), SOLUTION aka (### What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?) or AUTOMATED TESTS aka (### What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?). b. SUBSTANTIAL: With focus on the ROOT CAUSE, SOLUTION AND AUTOMATED TESTS sections, these will be accounted for significant differences on the ROOT CAUSE, SOLUTION and AUTOMATED TESTS sections (either one of them, or all three of them) - meaning if initially the proposal’s ROOT CAUSE, SOLUTION or AUTOMATED TESTS user content was mentioning a certain root cause, suggesting a certain solution or added automated test suggestions and the latest edit is mentioning a completely different ROOT CAUSE and / or considerable SOLUTION or AUTOMATED TESTS changes. VIII. BOT ACTIONS: 1. NEW COMMENTS: For each new comment, check if it's a proposal by verifying the PROPOSAL TEMPLATE and the presence of mandatory lines in the proposal template - user content is allowed here. ATTENTION BELOW, mandatory maintain the "{" & "}" brackets around {user} and {proposalLink} as they will be used for variable extraction. - If any proposal template MANDATORY LINE is missing, respond with: - ACTION_REQUIRED - MESSAGE: ⚠️ {user} Thanks for your [proposal]({proposalLink}). Please update it to follow the [proposal template](https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/main/contributingGuides/PROPOSAL_TEMPLATE.md?plain=1), as proposals are only reviewed if they follow that format. - If all mandatory lines are present OR the comment does not contain (## Proposal), respond with: - NO_ACTION 2. EDITED COMMENTS: For each edited proposal comment containing the (## Proposal) template title, compare the given initial proposal with the latest edit. ATTENTION BELOW, mandatory maintain the "{" & "}" brackets around {user} and {proposalLink} as they will be used for variable extraction. - If changes are SUBSTANTIAL, respond with: - ACTION_EDIT - MESSAGE: 🚨 Edited by **proposal-police**: This proposal was **edited** at {updated_timestamp}. - If changes are MINOR, respond with: - NO_ACTION ```

4. Ensure the selected Model is gpt-4o.

5. Scroll down to the MODEL CONFIGURATION section and set Response format to json_schema then add the following schema:

   JSON Schema - Structured Response

   ```json { "name": "action_schema", "strict": true, "schema": { "type": "object", "properties": { "action": { "type": "string", "enum": [ "NO_ACTION", "ACTION_EDIT", "ACTION_REQUIRED" ], "description": "Indicates the action type." }, "message": { "type": "string", "description": "An optional template message that can be empty or specified." } }, "required": [ "action", "message" ], "additionalProperties": false } } ```

6. Save and you're all set ✅.

ℹ️ Review and Testing

• before proceeding with any of the steps, make sure to review the updated System instructions mentioned above in step (3) so we can adjust them before implementing
• if you want to test the GH action and updated AI assistant, I created a clone @ expensify-proposal-testing where the action / assistant responses for each comment can be viewed in the repository's Actions section, as well as post different variations of proposal / non-proposal comments on this issue where I already performed testing

cc @thienlnam @marcochavezf

PR Author Checklist

• [x] I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• [x] I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • [x] I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • [x] I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • [x] I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • [x] I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • [x] I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • [x] I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• [x] I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• [x] I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • [x] Android: Native
  • [x] Android: mWeb Chrome
  • [x] iOS: Native
  • [x] iOS: mWeb Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Desktop
• [x] I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• [x] I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • [x] I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • [x] I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • [x] I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • [x] I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • [x] If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • [x] I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • [x] I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • [x] I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • [x] I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• [x] If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• [x] I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• [x] I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• [x] I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• [x] I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• [x] I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• [x] If any new file was added I verified that:
  • [x] The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• [x] If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • [x] A similar style doesn't already exist
  • [x] The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• [x] If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• [x] If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• [x] If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• [x] If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• [x] If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • [x] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [x] I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• [x] If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• [x] I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• [x] If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@dominictb Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[ikevin127]

@dominictb This will not require C+ review.

Note for reviewers

The reason for changes in all the other non-proposal-police related GH action files is because of the changes in CONST file, where I corrected one of the action constants and added a new one.

[ikevin127]

@thienlnam Just pushed the requested changes and also:

• updated PR Description - AI Assistant instructions ✅
• updated PR Description - AI Assistant json_schema ✅

to comply with the request from https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/55108#discussion_r1911808234.

[thienlnam]

Reviewer Checklist

• [x] I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• [x] I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• [x] I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • [x] I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • [x] I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • [x] I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • [x] I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
• [x] I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• [x] I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• [x] I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • [x] Android: Native
  • [x] Android: mWeb Chrome
  • [x] iOS: Native
  • [x] iOS: mWeb Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Desktop
• [x] If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• [x] I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • [x] I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
  • [x] I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • [x] I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • [x] I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • [x] I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • [x] I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • [x] I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • [x] I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• [x] If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• [x] I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• [x] I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• [x] I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• [x] I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• [x] If a new component is created I verified that:
  • [x] A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • [x] All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • [x] The file is named correctly
  • [x] The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • [x] The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • [x] For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • [x] Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • [x] All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • [x] The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• [x] If any new file was added I verified that:
  • [x] The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• [x] If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • [x] A similar style doesn't already exist
  • [x] The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
• [x] If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• [x] If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• [x] If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• [x] If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• [x] If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • [x] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [x] I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• [x] If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• [x] For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
• [x] If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
• [x] I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[thienlnam]

Updated the assistant 🚀 sending it

[ikevin127]

@thienlnam Looks like runs failed a few times since this has been merged. Looks like issue is related to git actions checkout:

Error: fatal: unable to access 'https://github.com/Expensify/App/': The requested URL returned error: 502

But seems to work now, not sure why it wasn't finding 'https://github.com/Expensify/App/' before.

[ikevin127]

@thienlnam Did you update the AI assistant as requested in PR description following all steps ?

Asking because here's a recent run (post PR) where it looks like the parsed response is NO_ACTION (string), meaning it didn't return structured response which caused JSON.parse error and bot wouldn't return anything when there's such an error.

Note that besides the system instructions, I also added mandatory section which enforces structured response via JSON Schema - Structured Response (see OP steps).

[thienlnam]

I did update the response format, and checked again and it is still json_schema - is this the correct assistant? asst_A2nLg9DUrqi4MCH3PQXr5sx2

[ikevin127]

Hmm, weird. Maybe it takes some time to update 🤷

@thienlnam Should be the correct assistant since the GH action takes the ID automatically from secrets, but you could check just to be sure.

https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/7b8bb554e0c7aa23c9e01682d8b63694203b8455/.github/workflows/proposalPolice.yml#L19-L21

[thienlnam]

Ah it seems like it's actually a different assistant being used - cc @justinpersaud / @marcochavezf since I think you help set this up - if you have access to this assistant asst_ITdeb3p87GYwbfNvRAA5heGX, could you update it with the instructions in the PR description?

[ikevin127]

@thienlnam Got it, makes sense now - since from my tests the AI assistant updates usually apply instantly.

If the people you tagged are not around right now, you could create a new assistant with the instructions and response schema detailed in PR description and replace the ID in GitHub secrets PROPOSAL_POLICE_ASSISTANT_ID with the new one. Then ask them to delete / discontinue the old assistant since it's not used anywhere else as far as I know (even if not deleted, it won't charge us anyway since we won't query anymore).

[!important] Either way works as long as the exact steps from PR description are applied to the assistant.

Right now we still get old non-structured response which causes JSON.parse to error and bot won't do anything after that since we designed it to fail gracefully, meaning action will still be completed (green) unless GH is down or something else non-related to the proposal-police code.

We implemented graceful failing since otherwise the GH action would notify all people participating in the issue which we want to avoid (spam).

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.85-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.85-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

[justinpersaud]

@thienlnam I updated the assistant per instructions

[izarutskaya]

@ikevin127 Do we need QA testing this?

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.85-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.85-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.85-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	cancelled 🔪

[thienlnam]

Sorry, wasn't around but we should be all good now @izarutskaya No QA needed for this, we can verify

[ikevin127]

Looks good, instructions updated and returning structured responses now 👍

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.85-4 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	true ❌
🖥 desktop 🖥	failure ❌
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	failure ❌
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅

[github-actions[bot]]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.85-4 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	true ❌
🖥 desktop 🖥	cancelled 🔪
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	failure ❌
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅