bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5
2c88ad3efb
CI / lint (push) Successful in 3s
Build images / sign-extension (push) Successful in 4s
CI / extension-version (push) Successful in 2s
Build images / build-ml (push) Successful in 7s
Build images / build-agent (push) Successful in 7s
extension / lint (push) Successful in 16s
CI / frontend-build (push) Successful in 22s
CI / backend-lint-and-test (push) Successful in 31s
Build images / build-web (push) Successful in 9s
CI / integration (push) Successful in 2m39s
The refresh dispatch on run 5265 went green with every step skipped: the main-only guard did not fire, checkout took dev, and the reuse step read IS_REFRESH as false. So both workflow-level expressions evaluated false while the identical accessor works for force_build, which compares its value in the shell rather than in an expression. That is a guess until it is measured, and the failure is silent by construction — a refresh that evaluates false behaves exactly like an ordinary push and reports success. This prints the raw input beside the normalised value in the step that already exists to say what a run derived, so the two disagreeing is visible rather than inferred. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TTjbZZ6JirCMSaJzQV1RhA