[jsweep] Clean validate_memory_files.cjs

[github-actions]

Summary

Cleaned and modernized validate_memory_files.cjs from the actions/setup/js/ directory following jsweep best practices.

Context

This file runs in github-script context and validates that all files in a memory directory have allowed file extensions.

Changes Made

Code Improvements

1. Added ValidationResult typedef - Created a proper type definition for the return value instead of inline object type
2. Used optional chaining (?.) - Simplified allowAll check from !allowedExtensions || allowedExtensions.length === 0 to !allowedExtensions?.length
3. Converted to arrow function - Changed scanDirectory from function declaration to arrow function for consistency
4. Improved error message handling - Simplified the error message construction for extension display using logical OR
5. Removed unnecessary comments - Removed redundant inline comments that just repeated what the code does
6. Improved parameter documentation - Added default value notation to JSDoc parameters
7. Reordered logic - Moved directory existence check before extensions normalization for earlier return

Line Count

• Before: 85 lines
• After: 83 lines
• Reduction: 2% (2 lines)

Test Coverage

The file already has comprehensive test coverage with 21 test cases covering:

• ✅ Empty directories
• ✅ Non-existent directories
• ✅ Multiple file types (.json, .jsonl, .txt, .md, .csv, .log, .yaml, .xml)
• ✅ Files without extensions
• ✅ Subdirectory validation
• ✅ Deeply nested directories
• ✅ Case-insensitive extension matching
• ✅ Custom allowed extensions
• ✅ Empty allowed extensions array

All tests pass successfully.

Validation Results

✅ Formatting: npm run format:cjs - Passed
✅ Linting: npm run lint:cjs - Passed
✅ Type checking: npm run typecheck - Passed (2 pre-existing errors in other files, not in this file)
✅ Tests: npm run test:js -- --no-file-parallelism validate_memory_files - 21/21 tests passed

Before & After Example

Before:

// If allowedExtensions is not provided, undefined, or empty array, allow all files
const allowAll = !allowedExtensions || allowedExtensions.length === 0;

// Check if directory exists
if (!fs.existsSync(memoryDir)) {
  core.info(`Memory directory does not exist: ${memoryDir}`);
  return { valid: true, invalidFiles: [] };
}

// Normalize extensions to lowercase and trim whitespace
const extensions = allowedExtensions.map(ext => ext.trim().toLowerCase());

function scanDirectory(dirPath, relativePath = "") {
  // Implementation...
}

After:

const allowAll = !allowedExtensions?.length;

if (!fs.existsSync(memoryDir)) {
  core.info(`Memory directory does not exist: ${memoryDir}`);
  return { valid: true, invalidFiles: [] };
}

const extensions = allowedExtensions.map(ext => ext.trim().toLowerCase());

const scanDirectory = (dirPath, relativePath = "") => {
  // Implementation...
};

Impact

• ✅ No logic changes - behavior remains identical
• ✅ Improved code readability with modern JavaScript
• ✅ Better type safety with typedef
• ✅ All tests passing
• ✅ No breaking changes

AI generated by jsweep - JavaScript Unbloater

• expires on Feb 15, 2026, 6:53 AM UTC

[pelikhan]

@copilot lint, fix tests

[Copilot]

@pelikhan I've opened a new pull request, #15316, to work on those changes. Once the pull request is ready, I'll request review from you.

[pelikhan]

@copilot merge main and fix lint js

[Copilot]

@pelikhan I've opened a new pull request, #15319, to work on those changes. Once the pull request is ready, I'll request review from you.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR modernizes the GitHub-script-side memory validation utility while also introducing/refining several workflow, docs, and test behaviors across the repo.

Changes:

• Modernize actions/setup/js/validate_memory_files.cjs (typedefs, optional chaining, simplified error formatting).
• Improve robustness/consistency in error handling and tests (JS instanceof Error guards; Go test avoids flakiness under elevated permissions).
• Add/adjust workflow and documentation pieces (new refiner workflow + lock, safe-outputs docs addition, smoke schedule cron adjustment).

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 9 out of 9 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
actions/setup/js/validate_memory_files.cjs	Refactors memory file extension validation logic for readability/typing.
actions/setup/js/safe_output_handler_manager.cjs	Hardens error-to-string conversion in PR review submission path.
actions/setup/js/safe_output_unified_handler_manager.cjs	Same error handling hardening as the non-unified manager.
actions/setup/js/merge_remote_agent_github_folder.cjs	String-quote normalization and whitespace cleanup.
pkg/cli/logs_extract_zip_test.go	Makes extraction error test non-flaky when running with elevated permissions.
docs/src/content/docs/reference/safe-outputs.md	Documents unassign-from-user safe output type with example config.
.github/workflows/refiner.md	Adds a new “Code Refiner” agentic workflow manifest.
.github/workflows/refiner.lock.yml	Adds compiled lock workflow for refiner.md.
.github/workflows/smoke-copilot.lock.yml	Adjusts the compiled cron minute for the every-12h schedule.

---

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

[Copilot]

The PR description focuses on cleaning actions/setup/js/validate_memory_files.cjs, but this PR also adds a new refiner workflow (and its generated lock), updates safe-outputs docs, tweaks a Go test, and changes a scheduled cron in an existing lock file. Please either update the PR description to cover these additional changes (and their motivation), or split the workflow/doc/test updates into separate PRs to keep scope reviewable.

[Copilot]

safe-outputs.create-pull-request.reviewers is configured here, but the generated .github/workflows/refiner.lock.yml doesn’t appear to include any reviewer-assignment steps/config (no reviewer-related entries in the safe-outputs handler config). If this workflow needs to automatically request reviewers, wire this through in the compiled workflow (or enable/use the add-reviewer safe output instead); otherwise consider removing reviewers: to avoid implying behavior that won’t happen.

Suggested change

reviewers: [copilot]