Wire the performance audit into the pipeline with a budget per route
Budgets per route enforced in the pipeline, so a regression fails a check instead of reaching users.
The ticket
Enforce a per-route performance budget in the pipeline.
Acceptance criteria
- Each covered route has a stated budget with a rationale
- A seeded regression fails the check
- Measurements are repeatable enough not to flap
- Raising a budget requires a reviewed change
What lands as proof
A seeded regression failing, plus repeated runs showing the measurement is stable.
Why teams defer it
- Performance measurements in CI are noisy, and a flaky gate is disabled within a fortnight.
- Every budget is a commitment somebody has to defend when it blocks a release.
Questions
- What does the agent actually change?
- The ticket is scoped to one outcome: enforce a per-route performance budget in the pipeline. Work that serves that outcome is in scope, and anything outside it is left for a separate ticket, so the pull request stays reviewable.
- How do I know the work is done?
- The pull request carries the evidence, not only the diff. Here that means the budget fails on a deliberately regressed route, so a reviewer can confirm the result without reproducing the work locally.
- How much oversight does this need?
- The run stops for the plan, and the review bar is raised afterwards so that smaller suggestions block the merge too, not only serious findings.