fix: add maxLength: 65536 to create_issue and create_discussion body fields by Copilot · Pull Request #43911 · github/gh-aw

Copilot · 2026-07-07T02:28:41Z

create_discussion.body and create_issue.body lacked an explicit maxLength, so the SM-IS-01 validator applied its 10 KB global cap to both — silently truncating large report bodies. add_comment.body already carries maxLength: 65536 and is correctly exempt from this cap.

Changes

pkg/workflow/js/safe_outputs_tools.json and actions/setup/js/safe_outputs_tools.json (runtime copy — kept in sync):
- create_issue.body: add "maxLength": 65536
- create_discussion.body: add "maxLength": 65536; remove the "Maximum 10 KB" guidance text, which described the accidental cap rather than an intended constraint

After this change, all three content-body fields are treated identically by the SM-IS-01 validator:

Tool	`body.maxLength`	Effective cap
`add_comment`	`65536`	65 KB ✅
`create_issue`	`65536`	65 KB ✅
`create_discussion`	`65536`	65 KB ✅

…fields The SM-IS-01 global string-length cap (10 KB) is bypassed for any field with an explicit maxLength in the schema. add_comment.body correctly has maxLength: 65536 and is exempt. This commit adds the same maxLength to create_discussion.body and create_issue.body so they are also exempt from the 10 KB cap and deferred to handler-level (GitHub API) enforcement. Also removes the "Maximum 10 KB" guidance from create_discussion.body description, which described the accidental cap, not an intended limit. Fixes #43867 Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR updates the safe-outputs MCP tool schemas so create_issue.body and create_discussion.body declare an explicit maxLength: 65536, aligning them with add_comment.body and preventing the SM-IS-01 “10KB per string parameter” guardrail from applying to these body fields.

Changes:

Add maxLength: 65536 to create_issue.body.
Add maxLength: 65536 to create_discussion.body.
Remove the “Maximum 10 KB” guidance text from the create_discussion.body description (since it reflected an accidental cap, not an intended constraint).

Show a summary per file

File	Description
pkg/workflow/js/safe_outputs_tools.json	Updates the source tool schema definitions for issue/discussion `body` fields to declare a 65KB max length and adjusts discussion guidance text accordingly.
actions/setup/js/safe_outputs_tools.json	Mirrors the same schema updates in the runtime copy used by the safe-outputs MCP server.

Review details

Tip

Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Files reviewed: 2/2 changed files
Comments generated: 2
Review effort level: Low

        "body": {
          "type": "string",
          "minLength": 20,
+          "maxLength": 65536,
          "description": "Detailed issue description in Markdown. Must be the final intended body \u2014 not a placeholder or test value. Do NOT repeat the title as a heading since it already appears as the issue's h1. Include context, reproduction steps, or acceptance criteria as appropriate."


        "body": {
          "type": "string",
          "minLength": 20,
+          "maxLength": 65536,
          "description": "Detailed issue description in Markdown. Must be the final intended body \u2014 not a placeholder or test value. Do NOT repeat the title as a heading since it already appears as the issue's h1. Include context, reproduction steps, or acceptance criteria as appropriate."


github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:14:33Z

✅ PR Code Quality Reviewer completed the code quality review.

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:14:34Z

🧠 Matt Pocock Skills Reviewer has completed the skills-based review. ✅

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:14:40Z

✅ Design Decision Gate 🏗️ completed the design decision gate check.

No ADR enforcement needed: PR #43911 does not have the 'implementation' label and has only 3 new lines of code in business logic directories (threshold: 100).

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:15:13Z

✅ Test Quality Sentinel completed test quality analysis.

No test files were added or modified in this PR. This change adds maxLength validation to safe_outputs_tools.json configuration files only.

github-actions

The fix is clean and correct. Both create_issue.body and create_discussion.body now carry maxLength: 65536, consistent with add_comment.body. The two JSON files are kept in sync. The removal of the stale 10 KB truncation guidance from create_discussion.body is appropriate since that limit is no longer in effect. No issues found.

🧵 Reviewed using Impeccable skills by Impeccable Skills Reviewer · 10.5 AIC · ⌖ 5.81 AIC · ⊞ 4.9K

github-actions

Non-blocking observation on schema consistency

The core change is correct: create_issue.body and create_discussion.body now carry maxLength: 65536, matching add_comment.body and aligning all three content-body fields with the same effective limit.

One item to consider

The create_discussion.body description had actionable overflow guidance (trim / link to gist / use upload_asset) that was removed as part of cleaning up the stale 10 KB reference. That guidance is still needed — just updated to reflect the new ceiling. See inline comment.

All other aspects of the change are correct and the synchronisation of both JSON files is complete.

🔎 Code quality review by PR Code Quality Reviewer · 58.1 AIC · ⌖ 6.4 AIC · ⊞ 5.5K
_{Comment /review to run again}

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:23:24Z

          "type": "string",
-          "description": "Discussion content in Markdown. Do NOT repeat the title as a heading since it already appears as the discussion's h1. Include all relevant context, findings, or questions. Maximum 10 KB (10240 bytes). If your content is larger, trim it, link to an external artifact (for example a gist), or upload content via upload_asset instead of inlining."
+          "maxLength": 65536,
+          "description": "Discussion content in Markdown. Do NOT repeat the title as a heading since it already appears as the discussion's h1. Include all relevant context, findings, or questions."


Lost overflow guidance may degrade agent behaviour: the removed description told agents what to do when content exceeds the limit; no equivalent guidance has been added for the new 65536-byte ceiling.

💡 Explanation

The deleted text said:

If your content is larger, trim it, link to an external artifact (for example a gist), or upload content via upload_asset instead of inlining.

That guidance was tied to the old accidental 10 KB cap, but the need for fallback advice doesn't go away — it just applies to a different threshold now. Compare add_comment.body, which still contains:

If these limits are exceeded, the tool call will fail with a detailed error message indicating which constraint was violated.

Without equivalent wording in create_discussion.body, an AI agent that generates a 70 KB discussion body has no cue that it should trim or link out before calling the tool. Consider adding at minimum:

"description": "Discussion content in Markdown ... If your content exceeds 65536 characters, trim it or link to an external artifact instead of inlining."

Non-blocking — the schema constraint itself is correct — but this omission will silently degrade agent behaviour on large payloads.

github-actions

Skills-Based Review 🧠

Applied /diagnosing-bugs and /tdd — the fix is correct; leaving a comment on test coverage.

📋 Key Themes & Highlights

What's fixed

The root cause (missing maxLength in the JSON schema for create_issue.body and create_discussion.body) is correctly identified and addressed. Both files are updated in sync, which TestSafeOutputsToolsJSONInSync enforces. Removing the stale "Maximum 10 KB" guidance text from create_discussion.body is the right call.

One observation

No regression test — the bug was silent truncation caused by the missing maxLength. There is currently nothing in the test suite that would catch the 10 KB cap re-appearing. A test that validates a >10 KB body against the embedded schema would close this gap. (See inline comment.)

Positive highlights

✅ Minimal, focused diff — only the two required changes per file
✅ Both copies updated together; sync test already enforces this invariant
✅ PR description is clear and includes a before/after table

🧠 Reviewed using Matt Pocock's skills by Matt Pocock Skills Reviewer · 85.9 AIC · ⌖ 6.55 AIC · ⊞ 6.7K
_{Comment /matt to run again}

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:28:27Z

        "body": {
          "type": "string",
          "minLength": 20,
+          "maxLength": 65536,


[/tdd] No regression test for the fixed bug — a body > 10 KB should now be accepted for create_issue, but there is no test guarding against this regression.

💡 Suggested test shape

In safe_outputs_tools_test.go or samples_validation_test.go, add a case that validates a create_issue.body value larger than 10 KB against the embedded JSON schema and asserts it passes. Without this, the 10 KB cap could silently creep back in future schema edits without any failing test.

func TestSafeOutputsToolsBodyAcceptsLargeContent(t *testing.T) { bigBody := strings.Repeat("x", 11000) // > 10 KB, within new 65536 limit // validate bigBody against the embedded safe_outputs_tools.json schema for create_issue // expect: no maxLength violation }

@copilot please address this.

github-actions · 2026-07-07T06:28:57Z

Hey @Copilot 👋 — nice fix for the SM-IS-01 body-size inconsistency! Aligning create_issue.body and create_discussion.body to the same 65 KB cap as add_comment.body is the right call, and the removal of the now-inaccurate "Maximum 10 KB" description text in create_discussion is a good clean-up.

One thing worth addressing before merge:

No test coverage — the diff touches only the two mirrored JSON schema files but doesn't include any test changes. If there are existing tests that validate SM-IS-01 enforcement or the maxLength boundaries on these fields (e.g., in pkg/workflow/js/ or nearby), a test asserting the new 65 KB limit would help guard against future regressions.

If you'd like a hand adding coverage, here's a ready-to-use prompt:

Add a test that verifies the SM-IS-01 validator respects the new maxLength: 65536 on create_issue.body and create_discussion.body in pkg/workflow/js/safe_outputs_tools.json.

Specifically:
1. Locate the existing test suite for SM-IS-01 validation or safe_outputs_tools schema enforcement.
2. Add a test case that supplies a body string of exactly 65536 characters and asserts it passes validation.
3. Add a test case that supplies a body string of 65537 characters and asserts it fails validation.
4. Confirm that create_discussion.body and create_issue.body are both covered.

Warning

Firewall blocked 1 domain

The following domain was blocked by the firewall during workflow execution:

patchdiff.githubusercontent.com

To allow these domains, add them to the network.allowed list in your workflow frontmatter:

network:
  allowed:
    - defaults
    - "patchdiff.githubusercontent.com"

See Network Configuration for more information.

Generated by ✅ Contribution Check · 261.8 AIC · ⌖ 15.6 AIC · ⊞ 6.2K · ◷

github-actions · 2026-07-07T10:06:41Z

🎉 This pull request is included in a new release.

Release: v0.82.3

Initial plan

a547f51

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and pelikhan Jul 7, 2026

Copilot started work on behalf of pelikhan July 7, 2026 02:35 View session

Copilot AI linked an issue Jul 7, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

create_discussion and create_issue body fields silently capped at 10 KB — missing maxLength to opt out of SM-IS-01 global cap (cf. add_comment) #43867

Closed

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Fix create discussion and create issue body fields length limit~~ fix: add maxLength: 65536 to create_issue and create_discussion body fields Jul 7, 2026

Copilot finished work on behalf of pelikhan July 7, 2026 02:45

Copilot AI requested a review from pelikhan July 7, 2026 02:45

pelikhan marked this pull request as ready for review July 7, 2026 06:06

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 7, 2026 06:06

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of pelikhan July 7, 2026 06:07 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jul 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot approved these changes Jul 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2026

[aw] No-Op Runs #43499

Open

github-actions Bot reviewed Jul 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2026

[Contribution Check Report] Contribution Check — 2026-07-07 #43904

Open

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

pelikhan merged commit fac4c58 into main Jul 7, 2026
112 checks passed

pelikhan deleted the copilot/fix-create-discussion-create-issue-body-size branch July 7, 2026 06:30

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2026

Suggested test: copilot/create-issue-large-body githubnext/gh-aw-test#5795

Open

Uh oh!

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Jul 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Review details

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Non-blocking observation on schema consistency

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot Jul 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Skills-Based Review 🧠

What's fixed

One observation

Positive highlights

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot Jul 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Copilot AI commented Jul 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading