{"ts": "2026-10-08T16:56:07", "n": 1, "stop_hook_active": false, "hook_input_keys": ["background_tasks", "cwd", "effort", "hook_event_name", "last_assistant_message", "permission_mode", "prompt_id", "session_crons", "session_id", "stop_hook_active", "transcript_path"], "gate1": {"ran": false}, "gate3": {"ran": true, "variant": "indep", "reviewers": [{"id": "A", "approve": true, "findings": [{"severity": "minor", "file": "tinydb/database.py", "line": 229, "text": "The code drops the cached Table instances, but a Table the caller already holds (for example `t = db.table('old')`) keeps its old `_name`. Writing through `t` after the rename silently recreates an `old` table. This is hard to fix without a shared name indirection, so it's acceptable. Consider documenting it in the docstring."}, {"severity": "minor", "file": "tests/test_tinydb.py", "line": 857, "text": "The tests don't cover renaming when the storage is empty or uninitialised, or renaming to the same name. Renaming to the same name raises ValueError. The behaviour is reasonable but unspecified. Also, the new method has no entry in the docs or changelog."}], "cost_usd": 0.0402724, "turns": 4, "wall_s": 13.3, "error": null, "models": ["claude-sonnet-5-5"], "approve_raw": true}, {"id": "B", "approve": true, "findings": [{"severity": "minor", "file": "tinydb/database.py", "line": 229, "text": "A Table object the caller already holds for `old_name` is not invalidated. If they write through it after the rename, it recreates the old table. This is minor and matches how `drop_table` behaves."}], "cost_usd": 0.028292400000000002, "turns": 4, "wall_s": 10.6, "error": null, "models": ["claude-sonnet-5-5"], "approve_raw": true}], "blocking_findings": 0, "blocking": [], "pass": true, "cost_usd": 0.068565, "diff_chars": 2448}, "hidden": {"pass": 5, "fail": 0, "failed_reqs": []}, "blocked_by": null, "decision": "allow", "reason": "", "reason_chars": 0, "wall_s": 13.6}