GenAI-Powered Systemic Bug Evaluation and Management Assistant by rtsvetkov

Motivation

What is the decision critical question which one can ask on a bug? How this question affects the decision on a bug and why?

Let's make GenAI look on the bug from the systemic point and evaluate what we don't know. Which piece of information is missing to take a decision?

Description

To build a tool that takes a raw bug report (including error messages and context) and uses a large language model (LLM) to generate a series of structured, Socratic-style or Systemic questions designed to guide a the integration and development toward the root cause, rather than just providing a direct, potentially incorrect fix.

Goals

Set up a Python environment

Set the environment and get a Gemini API key. 2. Collect 5-10 realistic bug reports (from open-source projects, personal projects, or public forums like Stack Overflow—include the error message and the initial context).

Build the Dialogue Loop

1. Write a basic Python script using the Gemini API.
2. Implement a simple conversational loop: User Input (Bug) -> AI Output (Question) -> User Input (Answer to AI's question) -> AI Output (Next Question). Code Implementation

Socratic/Systemic Strategy Implementation

1. Refine the logic to ensure the questions follow a Socratic and Systemic path (e.g., from symptom-> context -> assumptions -> -> critical parts -> ).
2. Implement Function Calling (an advanced feature of the Gemini API) to suggest specific actions to the user, like "Run a ping test" or "Check the database logs."
3. Implement Bugzillla call to collect the
4. Implement Questioning Framework as LLVM pre-conditioning
5. Define set of instructions
6. Assemble the Tool

Resources

What are Systemic Questions?

Systemic questions explore the relationships, patterns, and interactions within a system rather than focusing on isolated elements.
In IT, they help uncover hidden dependencies, feedback loops, assumptions, and side-effects during debugging or architecture analysis.

Gitlab Project

gitlab.suse.de/sle-prjmgr/BugDecisionCritical_Question

---

Explore LLM evaluation metrics by thbertoldi

Description

Learn the best practices for evaluating LLM performance with an open-source framework such as DeepEval.

Goals

Curate the knowledge learned during practice and present it to colleagues.

-> Maybe publish a blog post on SUSE's blog?

Resources

https://deepeval.com

https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing

---

Background Coding Agent by mmanno

Description

I had only bad experiences with AI one-shots. However, monitoring agent work closely and interfering often did result in productivity gains.

Now, other companies are using agents in pipelines. That makes sense to me, just like CI, we want to offload work to pipelines: Our engineering teams are consistently slowed down by "toil": low-impact, repetitive maintenance tasks. A simple linter rule change, a dependency bump, rebasing patch-sets on top of newer releases or API deprecation requires dozens of manual PRs, draining time from feature development.

So far we have been writing deterministic, script-based automation for these tasks. And it turns out to be a common trap. These scripts are brittle, complex, and become a massive maintenance burden themselves.

Can we make prompts and workflows smart enough to succeed at background coding?

Goals

We will build a platform that allows engineers to execute complex code transformations using prompts.

By automating this toil, we accelerate large-scale migrations and allow teams to focus on high-value work.

Our platform will consist of three main components:

• "Change" Definition: Engineers will define a transformation as a simple, declarative manifest:
  
  • The target repositories.
    
  • A wrapper to run a "coding agent", e.g., "gemini-cli".
    
  • The task as a natural language prompt.
    
• "Change" Management Service: A central service that orchestrates the jobs. It will receive Change definitions and be responsible for the job lifecycle.
  
• Execution Runners: We could use existing sandboxed CI runners (like GitHub/GitLab runners) to execute each job or spawn a container.

MVP

• Define the Change manifest format.
  
• Build the core Management Service that can accept and queue a Change.
• Connect management service and runners, dynamically dispatch jobs to runners.
• Create a basic runner script that can run a hard-coded prompt against a test repo and open a PR.
  

Stretch Goals:

• Multi-layered approach, Workflow Agents trigger Coding Agents:
  
  1. Workflow Agent: Gather information about the task interactively from the user.
     
  2. Coding Agent: Once the interactive agent has refined the task into a clear prompt, it hands this prompt off to the "coding agent." This background agent is responsible for executing the task and producing the actual pull request.
     
• Use MCP:
  
  1. Workflow Agent gathers context information from Slack, Github, etc.
     
  2. Workflow Agent triggers a Coding Agent.
     
• Create a "Standard Task" library with reliable prompts.
  1. Rebasing rancher-monitoring to a new version of kube-prom-stack
     
  2. Update charts to use new images
     
  3. Apply changes to comply with a new linter
     
  4. Bump complex Go dependencies, like k8s modules
     
  5. Backport pull requests to other branches
• Add “review agents” that review the generated PR.
  

See also

---

Docs Navigator MCP: SUSE Edition by mackenzie.techdocs

Description

Docs Navigator MCP: SUSE Edition is an AI-powered documentation navigator that makes finding information across SUSE, Rancher, K3s, and RKE2 documentation effortless. Built as a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server, it enables semantic search, intelligent Q&A, and documentation summarization using 100% open-source AI models (no API keys required!). The project also allows you to bring your own keys from Anthropic and Open AI for parallel processing.

Goals

• [ X ] Build functional MCP server with documentation tools
• [ X ] Implement semantic search with vector embeddings
• [ X ] Create user-friendly web interface
• [ X ] Optimize indexing performance (parallel processing)
• [ X ] Add SUSE branding and polish UX
• [ X ] Stretch Goal: Add more documentation sources
• [ X ] Stretch Goal: Implement document change detection for auto-updates

Coming Soon!

• Community Feedback: Test with real users and gather improvement suggestions

Resources

• Repository: Docs Navigator MCP: SUSE Edition GitHub
• UI Demo: Live UI Demo of Docs Navigator MCP: SUSE Edition

---

issuefs: FUSE filesystem representing issues (e.g. JIRA) for the use with AI agents code-assistants by llansky3

Description

Creating a FUSE filesystem (issuefs) that mounts issues from various ticketing systems (Github, Jira, Bugzilla, Redmine) as files to your local file system.

And why this is good idea?

• User can use favorite command line tools to view and search the tickets from various sources
• User can use AI agents capabilities from your favorite IDE or cli to ask question about the issues, project or functionality while providing relevant tickets as context without extra work.
• User can use it during development of the new features when you let the AI agent to jump start the solution. The issuefs will give the AI agent the context (AI agents just read few more files) about the bug or requested features. No need for copying and pasting issues to user prompt or by using extra MCP tools to access the issues. These you can still do but this approach is on purpose different.

Goals

1. Add Github issue support
2. Proof the concept/approach by apply the approach on itself using Github issues for tracking and development of new features
3. Add support for Bugzilla and Redmine using this approach in the process of doing it. Record a video of it.
4. Clean-up and test the implementation and create some documentation
5. Create a blog post about this approach

Resources

There is a prototype implementation here. This currently sort of works with JIRA only.

---