[Pelis Agent Factory Advisor] Agentic Workflow Maturity Assessment & Recommendations

[github-actions[bot]]

📊 Executive Summary

The gh-aw-firewall repository demonstrates strong agentic workflow maturity (Level 4/5) with 15 active workflows covering security, testing, documentation, and operations. The repository effectively uses Pelis Agent Factory patterns including safe-outputs, meta-agents, cache memory, and network isolation. Key opportunities lie in adding code quality workflows (continuous simplicity, refactoring), performance analytics, and firewall-specific security automation.

🎓 Patterns Learned from Pelis Agent Factory

Key Insights from Documentation

• Specialization over generalization: 100+ workflows in gh-aw, each with narrow purpose, beats monolithic agents
• Natural language + structured frontmatter: Markdown with YAML config compiles to secure GitHub Actions
• Safe-outputs pattern: Pre-approved operations without write permissions (create-issue, create-pr, add-comment)
• Meta-agents: Agents monitoring agents (CI Doctor, Workflow Health Manager, Metrics Collector)
• Cache memory: Persistent storage across runs for deduplication, state tracking, historical analysis
• "Continuous X" pattern: Continuous Simplicity, Continuous Documentation, Continuous Refactoring

Comparison to Current Implementation

What this repo does well:

• ✅ Uses safe-outputs extensively (10+ workflows)
• ✅ Implements meta-agents (ci-doctor monitors workflow failures)
• ✅ Cache memory pattern (issue-duplication-detector)
• ✅ Network isolation (plan.md uses firewall v0.10.0)
• ✅ Security-first approach (security-guard, security-review, dependency-security-monitor)

What could improve:

• ⚠️ No code quality/simplicity workflows
• ⚠️ No metrics collector or cost analysis
• ⚠️ No team culture/status workflows
• ⚠️ Limited firewall-specific automation (given domain expertise)

📋 Current Agentic Workflow Inventory

Workflow	Purpose	Trigger	Assessment
ci-cd-gaps-assessment	CI/CD pipeline gaps	Daily	✅ Good - finds testing gaps
ci-doctor	CI failure investigation	workflow_run	✅ Excellent - meta-agent
dependency-security-monitor	CVE monitoring	Daily	✅ Critical security function
doc-maintainer	Documentation sync	Daily	✅ Keeps docs current
issue-duplication-detector	Detect duplicate issues	issue opened	✅ Uses cache memory pattern
issue-monster	Assign issues to agents	Hourly + issue opened	✅ Novel "Cookie Monster" pattern
pelis-agent-factory-advisor	THIS WORKFLOW	Daily	🔄 Meta-analysis
plan	Interactive planning	/plan command	✅ ChatOps pattern
release	Build, test, release	Tag push	✅ Critical automation
security-guard	PR security review	Pull request	✅ Proactive security
security-review	Daily security audit	Daily	✅ Comprehensive scanning
smoke-claude	Validate Claude engine	Twice daily	✅ Engine health check
smoke-copilot	Validate Copilot engine	PR + weekly	✅ Engine health check
test-coverage-improver	Add tests for gaps	Weekly	✅ Security-focused testing
update-release-notes	Generate release notes	Tag push	✅ Release automation

Total: 15 active agentic workflows (strong coverage)

🚀 Actionable Recommendations

P0 - Implement Immediately

1. Firewall Traffic Pattern Analyzer

What: Daily workflow analyzing Squid logs to identify suspicious egress patterns, detect exfiltration attempts, and validate allowlist effectiveness.

Why: This repository IS a firewall - analyzing its own traffic logs would provide unique security insights AND validate the product itself. Currently logs exist but no automated analysis.

How:

---
description: Analyze Squid proxy logs for suspicious patterns and allowlist effectiveness
on:
  schedule: daily
  workflow_dispatch:
permissions:
  contents: read
tools:
  bash: ["cat:*", "grep:*", "awk:*"]
  github:
    toolsets: [default]
safe-outputs:
  create-issue:
    title-prefix: "[Firewall Alert] "
    labels: [security, firewall, automated]
---
# Daily Firewall Traffic Analysis

Analyze recent Squid access logs from test runs and production usage.
Identify:
- Blocked domains (potential exfiltration attempts)
- Unusual traffic patterns
- Domains that should be added/removed from allowlists
- Performance bottlenecks

Create an issue with findings and recommendations.

Effort: Low (1-2 days) - leverages existing logs, simple pattern matching

2. Code Simplicity Workflow

What: Daily analyzer for overly complex TypeScript code in src/, suggesting simplifications without changing functionality.

Why: The codebase is security-critical - simpler code is easier to audit and less prone to bugs. Pelis Factory pattern shows this compounds over time.

How: Adapt from Automatic Code Simplifier:

---
description: Analyze recently modified TypeScript code for complexity and suggest simplifications
on:
  schedule: daily
  workflow_dispatch:
  skip-if-match:
    query: 'is:pr is:open in:title "[code-simplification]"'
    max: 1
permissions:
  contents: read
  issues: read
tools:
  github:
    toolsets: [default]
  bash: ["git:*", "grep:*"]
safe-outputs:
  create-pull-request:
    title-prefix: "[code-simplification] "
    draft: true
---
# Continuous Code Simplification

Analyze TypeScript code modified in the last 3 commits.
Focus on: src/cli.ts, src/docker-manager.ts, src/squid-config.ts
Look for opportunities to simplify without changing functionality.
Create a PR with improvements.

Effort: Low (1 day) - reuse pattern from agentics collection

3. Workflow Performance Metrics Collector

What: Daily collector gathering execution time, token usage, and cost estimates for all agentic workflows.

Why: Running 15 workflows daily adds up. Portfolio Analyst pattern from Pelis Factory identified 40% cost reduction opportunities. Need visibility to optimize.

How: Adapt Metrics Collector:

---
description: Collect daily performance metrics for all agentic workflows
on:
  schedule: daily
permissions:
  contents: read
  actions: read
tools:
  agentic-workflows:
  github:
    toolsets: [actions]
safe-outputs:
  create-discussion:
    title-prefix: "[Metrics] "
    category: "General"
---
# Daily Workflow Performance Metrics

Use `agentic-workflows` tool to audit recent workflow runs.
Aggregate: token usage, execution time, failure rates, cost estimates.
Identify workflows that are:
- Taking too long
- Using excessive tokens
- Failing frequently
- Producing low-value outputs

Post findings as a discussion with recommendations.

Effort: Low (2 days) - agentic-workflows tool provides data

---

P1 - Plan for Near-Term

4. CLI Consistency Checker

What: Weekly validator ensuring CLI help text, documentation, and actual behavior are consistent.

Why: awf has complex CLI options (--allow-domains, --dns-servers, --image-tag, etc.). Docs drift from implementation. CLI Consistency Checker pattern from Pelis Factory catches these automatically.

How: Adapt CLI Consistency Checker

Effort: Medium (3-4 days) - needs CLI parsing logic

5. Container Security Audit Workflow

What: Daily workflow analyzing Docker container security: base image vulnerabilities, exposed ports, volume mounts, capability escalation.

Why: awf uses NET_ADMIN capability and mounts host filesystem - critical to audit regularly. Current container-scan.yml is GitHub Actions native, not agentic.

How: Enhance existing container scanning with agentic analysis:

---
description: Analyze Docker container configurations for security issues
on:
  schedule: daily
  workflow_dispatch:
permissions:
  contents: read
tools:
  bash: ["docker:*", "grep:*"]
  github:
safe-outputs:
  create-issue:
    title-prefix: "[Container Security] "
    labels: [security, docker]
---
# Daily Container Security Audit

Analyze containers/agent/Dockerfile and containers/squid/Dockerfile.
Check for:
- Unnecessary capabilities beyond NET_ADMIN
- Overly permissive volume mounts
- Outdated base images
- Exposed secrets or credentials
- Privilege escalation risks

Create issue with findings and remediation steps.

Effort: Medium (3-4 days)

6. Squid Configuration Validator

What: Workflow that validates generated Squid configs for security misconfigurations, performance issues, and best practices.

Why: Squid ACL rules are the heart of the firewall. Misconfiguration = bypass. Need automated validation beyond unit tests.

How:

---
description: Validate Squid proxy configurations for security and performance
on:
  pull_request:
    paths:
      - 'src/squid-config.ts'
      - 'containers/squid/**'
  schedule: daily
permissions:
  contents: read
tools:
  bash: ["squid:*", "grep:*"]
safe-outputs:
  add-comment:
---
# Squid Configuration Security Validator

Analyze src/squid-config.ts for potential security issues:
- Overly permissive ACLs
- Missing log formats
- HTTP CONNECT vulnerabilities
- SSL bump risks
- Cache poisoning potential

Validate generated configs match security requirements.
Comment on PRs with findings.

Effort: Medium (4-5 days) - requires Squid expertise

7. Domain Allowlist Best Practices Enforcer

What: Workflow that analyzes domain allowlists in docs/examples and validates against security best practices.

Why: Users will copy examples. Bad examples = insecure deployments. Need to ensure examples follow least-privilege principle.

How:

---
description: Validate domain allowlists follow security best practices
on:
  pull_request:
    paths:
      - 'docs/**'
      - 'examples/**'
      - 'README.md'
  schedule: weekly
permissions:
  contents: read
safe-outputs:
  add-comment:
---
# Domain Allowlist Security Review

Review all domain allowlists in documentation and examples.
Flag potential issues:
- Wildcard domains (*.example.com)
- Overly broad allowlists
- CDNs that could be exploited
- Missing justification for domains
- Opportunities to narrow scope

Comment with security recommendations.

Effort: Medium (2-3 days)

---

P2 - Consider for Roadmap

8. Daily Team Status Report

What: Daily status report aggregating repository activity (issues, PRs, releases, commits).

Why: Team visibility. Pelis Factory uses this heavily. Low effort, high morale value.

How: Use Daily Team Status from agentics collection directly

Effort: Low (1 day) - pre-built pattern

9. Breaking Change Detector

What: Workflow detecting API/CLI breaking changes in PRs before merge.

Why: awf is used in CI/CD - breaking changes are painful. Early detection prevents user issues.

Effort: Medium (4-5 days)

10. Documentation Multi-Device Tester

What: Playwright-based tests validating docs render correctly on mobile/tablet/desktop.

Why: Docs-site/ exists - should validate rendering. Pelis Factory found mobile issues this way.

Effort: Medium (3-4 days) - requires Playwright setup

11. Duplicate Code Detector

What: Semantic analysis to find duplicate patterns in TypeScript codebase.

Why: Code deduplication improves maintainability. Less code = smaller attack surface.

Effort: High (5-7 days) - requires semantic analysis setup

---

P3 - Future Ideas

12. Firewall Rule Performance Optimizer

What: Analyze iptables rules and Squid ACLs for performance bottlenecks, suggest optimizations.

Effort: High (7+ days)

13. Egress Traffic ML Anomaly Detector

What: Train model on normal traffic patterns, detect anomalies indicating compromise or data exfiltration.

Effort: Very High (10+ days)

14. Security Compliance Campaign Tracker

What: Track vulnerability remediation with deadlines (like Pelis Factory's Security Compliance workflow).

Effort: Medium (4-5 days)

15. User Feedback Aggregator

What: Aggregate GitHub issues/discussions/PRs to identify common user pain points.

Effort: Medium (3-4 days)

---

📈 Maturity Assessment

Current Level: 4/5 - Advanced

• ✅ 15 active workflows across multiple categories
• ✅ Meta-agents (ci-doctor)
• ✅ Security-focused (5 security workflows)
• ✅ Intelligent scheduling (daily, weekly, hourly, event-driven)
• ✅ Safe-outputs and scoped permissions throughout
• ⚠️ Missing: code quality continuous improvement
• ⚠️ Missing: performance/cost analytics
• ⚠️ Missing: firewall-specific automation (surprising given domain)

Target Level: 5/5 - Exemplary

• Add code simplicity/refactoring workflows
• Implement metrics collection and portfolio analysis
• Create firewall-specific security automation
• Achieve cost optimization (like Pelis Factory's 40% reduction)

Gap Analysis:

1. Code Quality - Need continuous simplicity, duplicate detector (2-3 workflows)
2. Observability - Need metrics collector, portfolio analyst (2 workflows)
3. Domain-Specific - Need firewall traffic analyzer, Squid validator, domain allowlist enforcer (3-4 workflows)
4. Team Culture - Need daily status (1 workflow)

To reach Level 5: Implement P0 items (3 workflows) + P1 items (4 workflows) = 7 additional workflows

---

🔄 Comparison with Best Practices

Strengths vs Pelis Factory Patterns

Pattern	Pelis Factory	gh-aw-firewall	Assessment
Safe-outputs	✅ Extensive	✅ 10+ workflows	Excellent
Meta-agents	✅ Multiple	✅ ci-doctor	Good - could add more
Cache memory	✅ Common	✅ 1 workflow	Adequate - could expand
Security-first	✅ 5+ workflows	✅ 5 workflows	Excellent
Continuous Quality	✅ 8+ workflows	⚠️ None	Gap
Metrics/Analytics	✅ 3 workflows	⚠️ None	Gap
ChatOps	✅ Multiple	✅ /plan command	Good
Multi-phase	✅ Several	⚠️ Limited	Gap

Unique Opportunities Given Repository Domain

This repository is literally a firewall for agentic workflows - it should practice what it preaches:

1. Firewall Traffic Analysis (P0) - Analyze own product's logs
2. Domain Allowlist Security (P1) - Validate own security guidance
3. Squid Configuration Audit (P1) - Validate own core component
4. Container Security (P1) - Audit own Docker security

These workflows would:

• Validate the product (dogfooding)
• Provide reference implementations for users
• Catch security issues before users do
• Demonstrate firewall value to potential users

---

📝 Notes for Future Runs

Stored in /tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/:

• pelis-patterns-learned.md - Core patterns from Pelis Factory documentation
• gh-aw-firewall-analysis.md - Current repository state

Changes to Track Over Time

• Number of agentic workflows (current: 15)
• Workflow success rates (check via agentic-workflows tool)
• Coverage of Pelis Factory patterns
• Domain-specific automation maturity

Items to Revisit

• Once P0 items implemented, reassess for P1 priority
• After metrics collector added, use data to inform further optimizations
• Check if Issue Monster pattern scales (currently 1h frequency)
• Monitor if 15 workflows is overwhelming or manageable

---

🎯 Next Steps

1. Immediate: Implement P0 recommendations (est. 4-6 days total)

   • Firewall Traffic Pattern Analyzer
   • Code Simplicity Workflow
   • Workflow Performance Metrics Collector

2. This Quarter: Plan P1 recommendations (est. 15-20 days total)

   • CLI Consistency Checker
   • Container Security Audit
   • Squid Configuration Validator
   • Domain Allowlist Best Practices Enforcer

3. Ongoing: Monitor workflow health with new metrics collector

4. Monthly: Re-run this advisor to track progress

Expected Impact:

• Cost: 20-40% reduction (based on Pelis Factory experience)
• Security: Catch issues 24h earlier through automated analysis
• Code Quality: Gradual simplification, reduced tech debt
• Visibility: Clear metrics on workflow effectiveness

---

Generated by: Pelis Agent Factory Advisor
Date: 2026-01-23
Next Run: 2026-01-24 (daily schedule)

AI generated by Pelis Agent Factory Advisor

• expires on Jan 30, 2026, 8:58 PM UTC

[github-actions[bot]]

This discussion was automatically closed because it expired on 2026-01-30T20:58:52.487Z.