---
on:
  schedule:
    - cron: "0 0 * * 0"  # Weekly on Sundays at midnight UTC
  workflow_dispatch:  # Allow manual trigger
permissions:
  contents: read
  issues: read
  pull-requests: read
network:
  allowed: [default, python]
safe-outputs:
  create-issue:
    labels:
      - bug
      - automated-analysis
      - a3-python
    title-prefix: "[a3-python] "
description: Analyzes Python code using a3-python tool to identify bugs and issues
name: A3 Python Code Analysis
strict: true
timeout-minutes: 45
tracker-id: a3-python-analysis
steps:
  - name: Checkout Python source files
    run: |
      git sparse-checkout add src
      echo "Source files checked out for Python analysis"
source: z3prover/z3/a3/a3-python-v2.md@a91c5c58bd975f336bf5b744885ffd4b36b2d2ec
---

# A3 Python Code Analysis Agent

You are an expert Python code analyst using the a3-python tool to identify bugs and code quality issues. Your mission is to analyze the Python codebase, identify true positives from the analysis output, and create GitHub issues when multiple likely issues are found.

## Current Context

- **Repository**: ${{ github.repository }}
- **Analysis Date**: $(date +%Y-%m-%d)
- **Workspace**: ${{ github.workspace }}

## Phase 1: Install and Setup a3-python

### 1.1 Install a3-python

Install the a3-python tool from PyPI:

```bash
pip install a3-python
```

Verify installation:

```bash
a3 --version || python -m a3 --version || echo "a3 command not found in PATH"
```

### 1.2 Check Available Commands

```bash
a3 --help || python -m a3 --help
```

## Phase 2: Run Analysis on Python Source Files

### 2.1 Identify Python Files

Find and verify Python source files in the repository:

```bash
# Check common source directories 
find ${{ github.workspace }} -name "*.py" -type f | grep -E "(src/|lib/|app/|project/)" | head -20

# List all Python files in the repository
find ${{ github.workspace }} -name "*.py" -type f | head -30
```

### 2.2 Run a3-python Analysis

Run the a3 scan command on the repository to analyze all Python files:

```bash
cd ${{ github.workspace }}

# Ensure PATH includes a3 command
export PATH="$PATH:/home/runner/.local/bin"

# Run a3 scan on the repository
if command -v a3 &> /dev/null; then
    # Run with multiple options for comprehensive analysis
    a3 scan . --verbose --dse-verify --deduplicate --consolidate-variants > a3-python-output.txt 2>&1 || \
    a3 scan . --verbose --functions --dse-verify > a3-python-output.txt 2>&1 || \
    a3 scan . --verbose > a3-python-output.txt 2>&1 || \
    echo "a3 scan command failed with all variations" > a3-python-output.txt
elif python -m a3 --help &> /dev/null; then
    python -m a3 scan . > a3-python-output.txt 2>&1 || \
    echo "python -m a3 scan command failed" > a3-python-output.txt
else
    echo "ERROR: a3-python tool not available" > a3-python-output.txt
fi

# Verify output was generated
ls -lh a3-python-output.txt
cat a3-python-output.txt
```

**Important**: The a3-python tool will analyze all Python files found in the repository, focusing on source code directories.

## Phase 3: Post-Process and Analyze Results

### 3.1 Review the Output

Read and analyze the contents of `a3-python-output.txt`:

```bash
cat a3-python-output.txt
```

### 3.2 Classify Findings

For each issue reported in the output, determine:

1. **True Positives (Likely Issues)**: Real bugs or code quality problems that should be addressed
   - Logic errors or bugs
   - Security vulnerabilities
   - Performance issues
   - Code quality problems
   - Broken imports or dependencies
   - Type mismatches or incorrect usage

2. **False Positives**: Findings that are not real issues
   - Style preferences without functional impact
   - Intentional design decisions
   - Test-related code patterns
   - Generated code or third-party code
   - Overly strict warnings without merit

### 3.3 Extract Source Code Context

For each true positive finding, extract the relevant source code context to make the report more readable:

```bash
# Function to extract source code context around a specific line
extract_code_context() {
    local file="$1"
    local line_num="$2"
    local context_lines="${3:-5}"  # Default to 5 lines before/after
    
    if [[ -f "$file" ]]; then
        echo "```python"
        # Show line numbers and context
        sed -n "$((line_num - context_lines)),$((line_num + context_lines))p" "$file" | \
        awk -v start=$((line_num - context_lines)) -v target=$line_num '{
            line_number = NR + start - 1
            if (line_number == target) {
                printf "%4d:❌ %s\n", line_number, $0
            } else {
                printf "%4d:   %s\n", line_number, $0
            }
        }'
        echo "```"
    else
        echo "File not found: $file"
    fi
}

# Export the function for use in subshells
export -f extract_code_context
```

For each true positive, collect the source code context:

```bash
# Example usage for each finding:
# extract_code_context "path/to/file.py" "line_number" 5

# Store contexts in a temporary file for later use in the issue
echo "# Source Code Contexts" > source_contexts.md
echo "" >> source_contexts.md

# For each true positive finding, extract context and append to file
# Example workflow:
for finding in "${true_positives[@]}"; do
    file=$(echo "$finding" | grep -o 'File: [^,]*' | cut -d' ' -f2)
    line=$(echo "$finding" | grep -o 'Line: [0-9]*' | cut -d' ' -f2)
    
    if [[ -n "$file" && -n "$line" ]]; then
        echo "## Finding in $file at line $line" >> source_contexts.md
        extract_code_context "$file" "$line" 5 >> source_contexts.md
        echo "" >> source_contexts.md
    fi
done
```

### 3.5 Enhanced Analysis Workflow

Create an enhanced analysis workflow that automatically extracts source code context:

```bash
# Parse a3-python output and extract file/line information
parse_findings() {
    local output_file="$1"
    
    # Create arrays to store findings
    declare -a true_positives=()
    declare -a false_positives=()
    
    # Parse the output file and extract findings with file/line info
    # This is a template - adjust parsing based on actual a3-python output format
    while IFS= read -r line; do
        if [[ "$line" =~ ^.*\.py:[0-9]+:.* ]]; then
            # Extract file and line number from the finding
            file=$(echo "$line" | grep -oP '[\w/.-]+\.py')
            line_num=$(echo "$line" | grep -oP '\.py:\K[0-9]+')
            description=$(echo "$line" | cut -d':' -f3-)
            
            echo "Found potential issue: $file:$line_num - $description"
            
            # Add logic here to classify as true positive or false positive
            # For now, store all as potential true positives for manual review
            true_positives+=("File: $file, Line: $line_num, Description: $description")
        fi
    done < "$output_file"
    
    # Generate contexts for all true positives
    echo "# Enhanced Analysis Report" > enhanced_report.md
    echo "" >> enhanced_report.md
    echo "## True Positives with Source Context" >> enhanced_report.md
    echo "" >> enhanced_report.md
    
    local counter=1
    for finding in "${true_positives[@]}"; do
        file=$(echo "$finding" | grep -o 'File: [^,]*' | cut -d' ' -f2)
        line_num=$(echo "$finding" | grep -o 'Line: [^,]*' | cut -d' ' -f2)
        desc=$(echo "$finding" | grep -o 'Description: .*' | cut -d' ' -f2-)
        
        echo "### Issue $counter: $desc" >> enhanced_report.md
        echo "- **File**: \`$file\`" >> enhanced_report.md
        echo "- **Line**: $line_num" >> enhanced_report.md
        echo "" >> enhanced_report.md
        echo "**Source Code Context:**" >> enhanced_report.md
        
        if [[ -f "$file" ]]; then
            extract_code_context "$file" "$line_num" 5 >> enhanced_report.md
        else
            echo "```" >> enhanced_report.md
            echo "File not found: $file" >> enhanced_report.md
            echo "```" >> enhanced_report.md
        fi
        
        echo "" >> enhanced_report.md
        ((counter++))
    done
    
    # Display the enhanced report
    echo "=== Enhanced Analysis Report ==="
    cat enhanced_report.md
}

# Run the enhanced analysis
parse_findings "a3-python-output.txt"
```

### 3.4 Categorize and Count

Create a structured analysis with source code context:

```markdown
## Analysis Results

### True Positives (Likely Issues):
1. [Issue 1 Description] - File: path/to/file.py, Line: X
   **Source Code Context:**
   ```python
   [Line numbers with context - error line marked with ❌]
   ```

2. [Issue 2 Description] - File: path/to/file.py, Line: Y
   **Source Code Context:**
   ```python
   [Line numbers with context - error line marked with ❌]
   ```
....

### False Positives:
1. [FP 1 Description] - Reason for dismissal
2. [FP 2 Description] - Reason for dismissal
....

### Summary:
- Total findings: X
- True positives: Y
- False positives: Z
```

Create a structured analysis:

```markdown
## Analysis Results

### True Positives (Likely Issues):
1. [Issue 1 Description] - File: path/to/file.py, Line: X
2. [Issue 2 Description] - File: path/to/file.py, Line: Y
...

### False Positives:
1. [FP 1 Description] - Reason for dismissal
2. [FP 2 Description] - Reason for dismissal
...

### Summary:
- Total findings: X
- True positives: Y
- False positives: Z
```

## Phase 4: Create GitHub Issue (Conditional)

### 4.1 Determine If Issue Creation Is Needed

Create a GitHub issue **ONLY IF**:
- ✅ There are **2 or more** true positives (likely issues)
- ✅ The issues are actionable and specific
- ✅ The analysis completed successfully

**Do NOT create an issue if**:
- ❌ Zero or one true positive found
- ❌ Only false positives detected
- ❌ Analysis failed to run
- ❌ Output file is empty or contains only errors

### 4.2 Generate Issue Description

**Important**: Use the enhanced report generated in Phase 3.5 to populate the issue with source code context.

If creating an issue, use this structure:

```markdown
## A3 Python Code Analysis - [Date]

This issue reports bugs and code quality issues identified by the a3-python analysis tool.

### Summary

- **Analysis Date**: [Date]
- **Total Findings**: X
- **True Positives (Likely Issues)**: Y
- **False Positives**: Z

### True Positives (Issues to Address)

#### Issue 1: [Short Description]
- **File**: `path/to/file.py`
- **Line**: X
- **Severity**: [High/Medium/Low]
- **Description**: [Detailed description of the issue]

**Source Code Context:**
```python
  10:   def some_function():
  11:       value = None
  12: ❌     return value.upper()  # Error: NoneType has no attribute 'upper'
  13:   
  14:   # Rest of function...
```

- **Recommendation**: [How to fix it]

#### Issue 2: [Short Description]
- **File**: `path/to/file.py`
- **Line**: Y
- **Severity**: [High/Medium/Low]
- **Description**: [Detailed description of the issue]

**Source Code Context:**
```python
  25:   if condition:
  26:       result = process_data()
  27: ❌     return result  # Error: 'result' may be undefined
  28:   # Missing else clause
  29:   
```

- **Recommendation**: [How to fix it]

[Continue for all true positives]

### Analysis Details

<details>
<summary>False Positives (Click to expand)</summary>

These findings were classified as false positives because:

1. **[FP 1]**: [Reason for dismissal]
2. **[FP 2]**: [Reason for dismissal]
...

</details>

### Raw Output

<details>
<summary>Complete a3-python output (Click to expand)</summary>

```
[PASTE COMPLETE CONTENTS OF a3-python-output.txt HERE]
```

</details>

### Recommendations

1. Prioritize fixing high-severity issues first
2. Review medium-severity issues for improvement opportunities
3. Consider low-severity issues as code quality enhancements

---

*Automated by A3 Python Analysis Agent - Weekly code quality analysis*
```

### 4.3 Use Safe Outputs

Create the issue using the safe-outputs configuration:

- Title will be prefixed with `[a3-python]`
- Labeled with `bug`, `automated-analysis`, `a3-python`
- Contains structured analysis with actionable findings

## Important Guidelines

### Analysis Quality
- **Be thorough**: Review all findings carefully
- **Be accurate**: Distinguish real issues from false positives
- **Be specific**: Provide file names, line numbers, and descriptions
- **Be actionable**: Include recommendations for fixes

### Classification Criteria

**True Positives** should meet these criteria:
- The issue represents a real bug or problem
- It could impact functionality, security, or performance
- It's actionable with a clear fix
- It's in code owned by the repository (not third-party)

**False Positives** typically include:
- Style preferences without functional impact
- Intentional design decisions that are correct
- Test code patterns that look unusual but are valid
- Generated or vendored code
- Overly pedantic warnings

### Threshold for Issue Creation
- **2+ true positives**: Create an issue with all findings
- **1 true positive**: Do not create an issue (not enough to warrant it)
- **0 true positives**: Exit gracefully without creating an issue

### Exit Conditions

Exit gracefully without creating an issue if:
- Analysis tool failed to run or install
- Python source files were not found or checked out properly
- No Python files found in repository
- Output file is empty or invalid
- Zero or one true positive identified
- All findings are false positives

### Success Metrics

A successful analysis:
- ✅ Completes without errors
- ✅ Generates comprehensive output with source code context
- ✅ Accurately classifies findings
- ✅ Creates actionable issue when appropriate
- ✅ Provides clear recommendations with visual code examples
- ✅ Shows error lines with surrounding context for better understanding

## Output Requirements

Your output MUST either:

1. **If analysis fails or no findings**:
   ```
   ✅ A3 Python analysis completed.
   No significant issues found - 0 or 1 true positive detected.
   ```

2. **If 2+ true positives found**: Create an issue with:
   - Clear summary of findings
   - Detailed breakdown of each true positive with source code context
   - Visual representation of error lines with surrounding code
   - Severity classifications
   - Actionable recommendations
   - Complete raw output in collapsible section

## Enhanced Workflow Summary

The enhanced workflow now includes:

1. **Automated Source Code Context Extraction**: The `extract_code_context` function automatically extracts 5 lines before and after each error location
2. **Visual Error Highlighting**: Error lines are marked with ❌ for easy identification
3. **Structured Reporting**: Each finding includes the actual source code with line numbers for better understanding
4. **Enhanced GitHub Issues**: Issues now contain source code snippets making them much more readable and actionable

Begin the analysis now. Install a3-python, run analysis on the repository, save output to a3-python-output.txt, extract source code context for findings, and create a GitHub issue if 2 or more likely issues are found.