Refine OpenClaw payloads and reorganize docs
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-paywalled-content",
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Article may be behind a paywall.",
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"paywall",
|
||||
"quality",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 95,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-paywalled-content",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Article may be behind a paywall.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"quality",
|
||||
"paywall"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 95
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"matched_rules": [
|
||||
"review-worth-keeping-other"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"reasons": [
|
||||
"Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched."
|
||||
],
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"needs-review",
|
||||
"summary"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60,
|
||||
"matches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"rule_id": "review-worth-keeping-other",
|
||||
"decision": "review",
|
||||
"reason": "Worth-keeping signal is positive but no stronger keep rule matched.",
|
||||
"labels": [
|
||||
"summary",
|
||||
"needs-review"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"priority": 60
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user