[13/14] Guide multi-framework GitHub Actions onboarding

[anmarchenko]

What

Expose ddtest onboard with read-only workflow discovery, framework-specific GitHub Actions guidance selecting the latest tracer and a human credential handoff for all nine supported frameworks. Use the shared read-only DetectPlatform/DetectFramework APIs directly, without a separate test-project detector or flag-selection wrapper. Link the root help to onboarding and exercise onboard before testdrive in the public integration fixtures.

Part 13/14 of the replacement stack for #128. Review against #145, this PR's base. Next: #147.

Why

Customers and coding agents need a clear path from repository detection through local verification to CI setup.

E2E testing

Use this PR’s checkout or its prerelease. When building from source, use Go 1.27.1 (as pinned in go.mod) and run go build -o /tmp/ddtest-qa . from the DDTest root. Commands below use /tmp/ddtest-qa.

Prerequisites: disposable Git repositories covering all nine supported frameworks, installed test dependencies, and sample .github/workflows/*.yml files. Include a workflow with separate lint/test jobs and a repository with multiple test frameworks. Record a clean Git status and manifest/workflow checksums.

1. Run /tmp/ddtest-qa --help: expect onboarding to be discoverable. Run /tmp/ddtest-qa onboard in each single-framework project. Expect the detected framework, relevant workflow/job, matching setup instructions, and the human credential handoff; no files should change.
2. In a mixed-framework repository, run without hints: expect a selection diagnostic. Repeat with --framework for each runner and verify its corresponding instructions. Add a Datadog action to a different job and repeat: inspect the resulting guidance against the actual test job’s setup.
3. Remove workflows and repeat. Expect a clear diagnostic that no GitHub Actions test workflow was found, with no file changes. Add an unrelated lint workflow: it must not be presented as proof of configured test instrumentation.
4. From a fresh project, manually follow the printed setup instructions on a temporary QA branch, supplying QA credentials through GitHub secrets. Run the suggested GitHub Actions job. Expect the intended tests and instrumentation to run; inspect received tests in the QA Datadog account. Never put secret values in the PR or repository.
5. Run the local /tmp/ddtest-qa testdrive --yes flow with no Datadog credentials/Agent. Expect local events and a report; a deliberately failing assertion must still produce a report and a nonzero exit status.
6. Compare the pre-onboard checksums to the immediate post-onboard state (before manual edits): they must match. Remove temporary QA branches/workflows, secrets created only for this exercise, projects, and sessions.

Inspect each generated action example: its language-specific tracer-version input must be an explicitly empty string, overriding the action's pinned default. Follow that example and verify the installed tracer is the latest available release; Python and Ruby must not receive a literal latest version constraint.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-22T11:24:45.709723Z	ccace88	PR opened

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ccace882ef

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Track GitHub Action setup per test job

When one workflow file contains multiple test jobs and only one job uses the Datadog action, this file-level substring check marks the entire workflow as configured. Because RunWithFramework compares counts of workflow files, it then reports that every detected workflow is configured and suppresses the setup instructions even though the other jobs remain uninstrumented. Track configuration at job granularity, consistent with the generated instruction to add the action once per test job.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Provide ESM-compatible Cypress instrumentation

For Cypress projects using an ESM configuration such as cypress.config.mjs—which internal/framework/cypress.go explicitly supports—these instructions tell the user to call require(...) from the existing config. Node does not define require in an ES module, so following the onboarding guidance makes Cypress fail while loading its configuration. Provide an import/createRequire variant or direct ESM projects to a generated CommonJS wrapper.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

The workflow scan can report complete setup when only one job uses the Datadog action. Repository paths with glob syntax and non-US1 API key links also cause incorrect onboarding.

_{Open Bits AI session}

_{🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit ccace88 · @DataDog review to ask questions}

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

Check setup for each test job

The command can report complete setup while some test jobs have no Datadog setup.

Assertion details

• Input: A workflow file has two test jobs, but only one job uses the Datadog action.
• Expected: The scan must confirm that each matching test job uses the action for the selected language.
• Actual: The scan marks the whole workflow file as configured when it finds the action in any job.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎
_{🤖 Bits Code Review · @DataDog review to ask questions · Open Bits AI session}

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

Treat the repository root as a literal path

The onboarding command fails for valid repository paths that contain glob metacharacters.

Assertion details

• Input: The repository path contains a glob metacharacter, such as /tmp/project[old].
• Expected: The command must treat the repository root as a literal path.
• Actual: filepath.Glob reads metacharacters in the repository root as pattern syntax. It can miss valid workflow files or return an error.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎
_{🤖 Bits Code Review · @DataDog review to ask questions · Open Bits AI session}

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

Use the correct API key page

A non-US1 user can create a key for the wrong site, and authentication then fails.

Assertion details

• Input: The organization uses a Datadog site other than US1.
• Expected: The instructions must use the API key page for the selected Datadog site, or use a site-neutral page.
• Actual: The link always opens the US1 API key page.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎
_{🤖 Bits Code Review · @DataDog review to ask questions · Open Bits AI session}