The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
worldmonitor	Ignored	Preview	Jul 10, 2026 5:51am

Greptile Summary

This PR reclassifies unrest count resolution specs from hard to judged, applying the same fix already made for conflict specs in #5136. The root cause is identical: unrest:events-resolution:v1 is empty without ACLED credentials, so any hard spec pointing at it would sit pending/VOID forever while inflating the nominal hard-ratio metric.

• Adds UNREST_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE = false flag (mirroring CONFLICT_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE) and gates the case 'unrest' path in deriveHardMetrics behind it, preserving the horizon-scaled threshold logic for future re-enablement.
• Adds a domain === 'political' branch to buildQuestion, emitting an instability-framed question for judged political specs, consistent with the existing conflict escalation-framed question.
• Test suite updated: the former scoped-regression test is split into two tests — one proving unrest is now judged by default, one proving cyber remains hard; feed-mapping and R4 fixture tests pass { unrestCountFeedAvailable: true } to exercise the preserved threshold path.

Confidence Score: 4/5

Safe to merge; the reclassification is a straightforward flag-gate following the proven conflict pattern and all 404 tests pass.

The implementation faithfully mirrors the CONFLICT_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE pattern — same early-return structure, same options-override escape hatch, same threshold logic preserved for re-enablement. The only gaps are a missing horizon assertion in the new unrest judged test and a pre-existing test whose implied code path is now shadowed by the early flag return, leaving the tally-null case for unrest untested under unrestCountFeedAvailable: true. Neither gap affects production behavior.

tests/forecast-resolution.test.mjs — the two test-coverage gaps noted; scripts/_forecast-resolution.mjs is clean.

Important Files Changed

Flowchart

%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart TD
    A[buildResolutionSpec] --> B{state_derived?}
    B -- yes --> J[buildJudgedSpec]
    B -- no --> C{prediction_market signal?}
    C -- yes --> H[buildHardSpec / prediction_market]
    C -- no --> D{JUDGED_DOMAINS?}
    D -- yes --> J
    D -- no --> E[resolveHardFamily]
    E -- no family --> J
    E -- family found --> F[buildHardSpec]
    F --> G[deriveHardMetrics]
    G -- conflict/ucdp_zone --> I1{CONFLICT_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE?}
    I1 -- false default --> J
    I1 -- true --> M1[hard conflict spec]
    G -- unrest --> I2{UNREST_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE? NEW}
    I2 -- false default --> J
    I2 -- true --> M2[hard unrest spec]
    G -- cyber/other --> M3[hard spec]
    J --> Q[buildQuestion]
    Q -- domain==conflict --> Q1[escalation-framed question]
    Q -- domain==political --> Q2[instability-framed question NEW]
    Q -- other --> Q3[generic question]

%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {"darkMode": true, "background": "#0d1117", "primaryColor": "#21262d", "primaryTextColor": "#e6edf3", "primaryBorderColor": "#8b949e", "lineColor": "#8b949e", "textColor": "#e6edf3", "edgeLabelBackground": "#161b22", "actorBkg": "#21262d", "actorBorder": "#8b949e", "actorTextColor": "#e6edf3", "actorLineColor": "#8b949e", "signalColor": "#8b949e", "signalTextColor": "#e6edf3", "noteBkgColor": "#373320", "noteBorderColor": "#d4a72c", "noteTextColor": "#f0e6c0", "labelBoxBkgColor": "#21262d", "labelBoxBorderColor": "#8b949e", "labelTextColor": "#e6edf3", "loopTextColor": "#e6edf3", "activationBkgColor": "#30363d", "activationBorderColor": "#8b949e"}}}%%
flowchart TD
    A[buildResolutionSpec] --> B{state_derived?}
    B -- yes --> J[buildJudgedSpec]
    B -- no --> C{prediction_market signal?}
    C -- yes --> H[buildHardSpec / prediction_market]
    C -- no --> D{JUDGED_DOMAINS?}
    D -- yes --> J
    D -- no --> E[resolveHardFamily]
    E -- no family --> J
    E -- family found --> F[buildHardSpec]
    F --> G[deriveHardMetrics]
    G -- conflict/ucdp_zone --> I1{CONFLICT_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE?}
    I1 -- false default --> J
    I1 -- true --> M1[hard conflict spec]
    G -- unrest --> I2{UNREST_COUNT_FEED_AVAILABLE? NEW}
    I2 -- false default --> J
    I2 -- true --> M2[hard unrest spec]
    G -- cyber/other --> M3[hard spec]
    J --> Q[buildQuestion]
    Q -- domain==conflict --> Q1[escalation-framed question]
    Q -- domain==political --> Q2[instability-framed question NEW]
    Q -- other --> Q3[generic question]

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "fix(forecast): reclassify unrest count s..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

Addressed both Greptile P2 test-coverage gaps (commit e3587c6):

• Missing horizon assertion: the unrest judged test now asserts spec.question matches /7d/, matching the conflict test's rigor.
• Shadowed tally-null path: added a test that forces unrestCountFeedAvailable: true with a non-numeric count signal → still falls back to judged (the preserved tally-null guard the flag early-return shadows by default).

60/60 in forecast-resolution.test.mjs, 404 forecast .mjs overall.

Added the missing pending-ledger migration (commit 08074fd). #5138 migrated existing pending conflict count entries to judged, but this PR originally only changed new-forecast emission — existing pending unrest count rows would stay stuck. Generalized migratePendingConflictCountEntryToJudged → table-driven migratePendingCountEntryToJudged over conflict + unrest (each with its own flag gate + question builder). New unrest-migration test + updated the two existing conflict-migration tests (they encoded the old 'unrest resolves' premise). 150 forecast tests green. #5142 is now the complete unrest fix — emission + backlog, parallel to #5138.