[AIAA] Add the assessment request intake form - #371
Conversation
Assisted-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Nate W <natew@cncf.io>
✅ Deploy Preview for cncf-techdocs ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds a new GitHub Issue Form to collect intake information for AI-assisted documentation assessments, including required allowlist domains and an explicit AI-disclosure acknowledgement, aligning with the AIAA “step 3” intake-form requirement.
Changes:
- Introduces a new issue form template for “Documentation assessment request”.
- Captures project basics, in/out-of-scope context, required documentation domains, and required project contacts.
- Adds a required checkbox to acknowledge AI involvement and sets default labels on submission.
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.
Suppressed comments (1)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/assessment-request.yml:33
- The intake asks for an unspecified “CNCF maturity level,” but this codebase evaluates upgrade-request analyses against the proposed level (
docs/analysis/howto.md:32-35). A requester can therefore select their current level when the writer actually needs the target level, causing the assessment to use the wrong rubric. Clarify that this field is the level to assess and direct upgrade requests to select the proposed level.
label: CNCF maturity level
… level Assisted-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Nate W <natew@cncf.io>
| name: Documentation assessment request | ||
| description: Request an AI-assisted assessment of your project's documentation. | ||
| title: '[Assessment request]: ' | ||
| labels: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The label Docs analysis might be better as `analysis-requested' - would that be the default?
The requestor wouldn't put `needs-triage' - right?
Adds
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/assessment-request.yml: the intake formfor AI-assisted documentation assessments. Build step 3 (spec section
16); fields per section 7, allowlist domains per section 11,
disclosure per HC-6. Tracking: #370.
What it collects
CNCF maturity, website, docs site, repository, in and out of scope,
tooling.
and these entries seed its allowlist at acceptance; an explicit,
auditable, reversible contract per assessment.
drafting begins, whoever filed (HC-6).
Guardrails in the form
technical writer triages and accepts (NG-5, P-1).
required checkbox (HC-6): no project discovers it after the fact.
Docs analysis(existing convention) andneeds-triage(added by the step 1 PR).Verification
required fields enforced, disclosure present, labels set.
npm run checkpasses.close it. Runs after the step 1 PR merges, or the
needs-triagelabel drops silently.