get_file_contents accepts a ref instead of just branch

[tonytrg]

#get_file_contents now accepts:

• refs
• sha

instead of just branches.

Closes: #539

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR expands get_file_contents to accept arbitrary git refs and SHAs rather than only branches.

• Replaces the branch parameter with ref and sha in the tool’s schema
• Updates GetFileContents logic to handle ref, sha, and special pull-request refs
• Refreshes tests and snapshots to assert ref/sha instead of branch

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
pkg/github/repositories.go	Swapped out branch schema, added ref/sha handling and PR logic
pkg/github/repositories_test.go	Updated tests to check for ref/sha instead of branch
pkg/github/toolsnaps/get_file_contents.snap	Removed branch from snapshot and added ref/sha properties

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

pkg/github/repositories_test.go:84

• There are no tests covering the new sha parameter or the pull-request ref branch. Consider adding a test case that passes a sha directly and one for a refs/pull/<n>/head to verify the override logic.

				"ref":   "refs/heads/main",

pkg/github/repositories.go:473

• The code calls fmt.Errorf but I don't see an import for "fmt" in this diff. Please ensure that "fmt" is imported to avoid a compile error.

						return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to get GitHub client: %w", err)

[almaleksia]

Howdy 👋

Can we make the change backwards compatible because we depend on this tool: https://github.com/github/sweagentd/pull/3357

[williammartin]

Just as an aside, I think it's really nice to look at the snapshot to see the structural changes that have occurred without looking at the imperative tool handler.

[tonytrg]

Agree, just looking at the files commit history is pretty great way to check user faced changes.

[SamMorrowDrums]

I think we will use this for 1p clients to help them understand the diff.