惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
博客园_首页
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
Vercel News
Vercel News
G
Google Developers Blog
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
IT之家
IT之家
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
Y
Y Combinator Blog
B
Blog
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
C
Check Point Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
I
InfoQ
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
腾讯CDC
H
Help Net Security

DEV Community

Authentication Security Deep Dive: From Brute Force to Salted Hashing (With Java Examples) Why AI Systems Don’t Fail — They Drift Spilling beans for how i learn for exam😁"Reinforcement Learning Cheat Sheet" I Replaced Chrome with Safari for AI Browser Automation. Here's What Broke (and What Finally Worked) How Python Borrows Other People's Work The $40 Architecture: Processing 1 Billion API Requests with 99.99% Uptime Vibe Coding: A Workflow Guide (From Zero to SaaS) Most webhook security guides protect the wrong side. The scary part is delivery. Headless CMS for TanStack Start: Build a Blog with Cosmic EU Age Verification App "Hacked in 2 Minutes" — What Actually Happened Comfy Cloud’s delete function does not actually remove files Running AI Models on GPU Cloud Servers: A Beginner Guide Event-driven media intelligence with AWS Step Functions and Bedrock I scored 500 AI prompts across 8 quality dimensions — here's what broke How to Call Google Gemini API from Next.js (Free Tier, No Backend Needed) The Portal Protocol: Reclaiming Human Connection in the Age of AI How to Fix Your Team's Scattered Knowledge Problem With a Self-Hosted Forum Intro to tc Cloud Functors: A Graph-First Mental Model for the Modern Cloud Designing Multi-Tenant Backends With Both Ownership and Team Access I Built a Neumorphic CSS Library with 77+ Components — Here's What I Learned PostgreSQL Performance Optimization: Why Connection Pooling Is Critical at Scale Cómo construí un SaaS multi-rubro para gestionar expensas en Argentina con FastAPI + Vue 3 🚀 I Built an Ethical Hacking Scanner Tool – Open Source Project I Replaced /usage and /context in Claude Code With a Single Statusline A Pythonic Way to Handle Emails (IMAP/SMTP) with Auto-Discovery and AI-Ready Design I Collected 8.9 Million Polymarket Price Points — Here's What I Found About How Markets Really Move EcoTrack AI — Carbon Footprint Tracker & Dashboard Everyone's Using AI. No One Agrees How. 5 self-hosted ebook managers worth trying in 2026 Building Your First AI Agent with LangChain: From Chatbot to Autonomous Assistant
Introducing *beta* Remogram: forge facts for agents, with...
John Attebury · 2026-06-15 · via DEV Community

If you've ever pointed an AI coding agent at a pull request and watched it confidently merge based on a stale title, a truncated API response, or prose that looked like instructions, you've hit a boundary problem. Git hosts know a lot. Agents need small, typed, trustworthy facts, not raw forge dumps and not your team's SDLC vocabulary mixed into SCM output.

Remogram is a generic SCM/forge boundary: a CLI and MCP server that turns GitHub, GitLab, and Gitea into provider-attributed JSON packets agents can reason about safely.

Remogram was developed by and for Topogram, but you don't need Topogram to use it. It stands on its own as open-source tooling for any repo that wants better agent–forge hygiene.

The problem

Modern agent workflows need answers to boring but critical questions:

  • Is this PR mergeable, or only technically mergeable?
  • What do CI checks actually say?
  • Does the forge's head_sha still match what git has locally?
  • How far is my branch behind integration?

You can answer these with gh, glab, tea, or REST calls, but each path has tradeoffs:

  • CLI output varies by tool version and is hard to cap reliably.
  • Raw API responses are huge and easy to over-ingest into an agent context window.
  • Forge strings are untrusted. PR titles, check descriptions, and error bodies can contain adversarial prose.
  • Workflow tools leak semantics. Goal branches, lanes, and task IDs belong in planning layers, not in SCM facts.

Agents need a thin, opinionated layer that says: here are the forge facts, here's what you can trust in the envelope, here's what you must treat as untrusted prose.

That layer is Remogram.

What Remogram does

Remogram reads your repo's .remogram.json and speaks to your forge over HTTP APIs. You don't need to install official forge CLIs.

Core read/plan commands include:

remogram doctor --json
remogram repo status --json
remogram pr view --number 42 --json
remogram pr checks --number 42 --json
remogram merge plan --number 42 --json
remogram refs compare --base main --head feature/x --json

The same packets are available through MCP tools, so Cursor, Codex, and other MCP clients get identical JSON whether they call the CLI or the server.

Every packet shares a trusted envelope: type, schema_version, provider_id, remote_name, repo_id, observed_at, and ok. That consistency matters. An agent (or orchestrator) can gate on structure instead of parsing ad hoc CLI text.

Designed for agent trust, not just convenience

Remogram makes a few deliberate choices:

Bounded ingest. Forge responses are capped (default 8192 bytes) and fields are selected explicitly, not dumped wholesale into agent context.

Sanitized strings. Error messages and forge-sourced text go through structural sanitization; secrets like ghp_, gho_, and ghs_ tokens are redacted before they reach packets.

Stale head detection. When you ask about a PR by number, Remogram compares the forge-reported head_sha to what git resolves locally. If they diverge, you get ok: false with stale_head. That's a signal to git fetch, not to merge.

No workflow metadata in output. Remogram emits SCM/forge facts only. Goal branches, lanes, SDLC tasks, and proof semantics stay in external planning tools that consume Remogram, not inside Remogram itself.

Multi-forge from one shape. github-api, gitlab-api, and gitea-api providers normalize into the same packet types, so tooling built on Remogram isn't locked to a single host.

Why it's useful

For agent authors and skill maintainers

You get a stable contract instead of re-implementing forge adapters in every skill. Install the consumer skill, configure .remogram.json, run remogram doctor, and teach agents to read packets, not web UI prose.

For teams on self-hosted forges

Gitea and self-managed GitLab are first-class. Remogram was dogfooded on a private Gitea integration branch before export to public GitHub main. If your forge isn't GitHub.com, you still get the same typed facts.

For review and merge guardrails

merge plan exposes blockers, not just mergeability. "Clean merge" and "safe to merge" are different things; Remogram is explicit about which checks are pending, missing, or failed. That's the difference between an agent that can merge and one that should wait.

For CI and headless environments

API providers need a token env var (GITHUB_TOKEN, GITLAB_TOKEN, GITEA_TOKEN), not an interactive CLI login. That fits servers, sandboxes, and lane worktrees cleanly.

Beta today, intentional scope

Remogram is in 0.1.0-beta: read/plan commands are mature; writes (starting with Gitea cr open) are opt-in via write_commands in config. Merge execute remains out of scope. Remogram informs decisions; humans and separate merge lanes still own the button.

Install:

npm install -g @remogram/cli@beta @remogram/mcp@beta

Copy .remogram.json.example, run remogram doctor --json, and try remogram pr view on an open change request. For a safe sandbox, use the remogram-smoke fixture repos mirrored on GitHub, GitLab, and Gitea.

The idea in one sentence

Remogram is the forge boundary layer agents should talk to: small packets, explicit trust, multi-forge parity, so your planning workflow, review policy, and merge authority can sit above SCM facts instead of leaking into them.