Fix run-results typo

[asafalina]

User description

Add a missing . in the json suffix.
from path/to/run-resultsjson
to path/to/run-results.json

---

PR Type

Bug fix, Documentation

---

Description

• Fix typo in README code example filename

• Correct run-resultsjson to run-results.json

• Ensures example code is syntactically correct

---

Diagram Walkthrough

flowchart LR
  A["README.md<br/>Code Example"] -- "Fix typo" --> B["run-results.json<br/>Correct Path"]

Loading

File Walkthrough

	Relevant files
Bug fix	README.md Fix filename typo in code example                                                README.md Fixed missing dot in filename from run-resultsjson to run-results.json Corrects code example in documentation to use valid file path Ensures users can properly follow the usage example +1/-1

---

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

README.md typo fixes: corrected file path references from "path/to/run-resultsjson" to "path/to/run-results.json" in two code block examples under the Run Results documentation section. No logic changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Documentation Corrections README.md	Fixed typographical error in file paths within Run Results example code blocks, adding missing dot separator in JSON file extension (run-resultsjson → run-results.json)

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

A typo lurked in the JSON's name,
Two dots were missing—what a shame!
With whiskers twitching, I fixed it right,
Now docs shine bright throughout the night! 🐰✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Fix run-results typo' directly and concisely describes the main change in the pull request: fixing a typographical error in the filename from 'run-resultsjson' to 'run-results.json'.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is clearly related to the changeset, providing detailed context about the typo fix, the specific change made, and its purpose with helpful diagrams and file walkthroughs.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d9497fd and e764084.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

README.md (1)

203-203: All run-results file paths are correct; no additional fixes needed.

Verification confirms that all instances of run-results file paths in README.md already have the correct .json extension. The change at line 203 was the only fix required, and all other code blocks (lines 210, 217, 224, 231, 238, 245) already had proper formatting. The fix is complete and accurate.

Tip

📝 Customizable high-level summaries are now available in beta!

You can now customize how CodeRabbit generates the high-level summary in your pull requests — including its content, structure, tone, and formatting.

• Provide your own instructions using the high_level_summary_instructions setting.
• Format the summary however you like (bullet lists, tables, multi-section layouts, contributor stats, etc.).
• Use high_level_summary_in_walkthrough to move the summary from the description to the walkthrough section.

Example instruction:

"Divide the high-level summary into five sections:

1. 📝 Description — Summarize the main change in 50–60 words, explaining what was done.
2. 📓 References — List relevant issues, discussions, documentation, or related PRs.
3. 📦 Dependencies & Requirements — Mention any new/updated dependencies, environment variable changes, or configuration updates.
4. 📊 Contributor Summary — Include a Markdown table showing contributions:
   | Contributor | Lines Added | Lines Removed | Files Changed |
5. ✔️ Additional Notes — Add any extra reviewer context.
   Keep each section concise (under 200 words) and use bullet or numbered lists for clarity."

Note: This feature is currently in beta for Pro-tier users, and pricing will be announced later.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[qodo-code-review]

PR Compliance Guide 🔍

Below is a summary of compliance checks for this PR:

Security Compliance
🟢	No security concerns identified No security vulnerabilities detected by AI analysis. Human verification advised for critical code.
Ticket Compliance
⚪	🎫 No ticket provided Create ticket/issue
Codebase Duplication Compliance
⚪	Codebase context is not defined Follow the guide to enable codebase context checks.
Custom Compliance
🟢	Generic: Comprehensive Audit Trails Objective: To create a detailed and reliable record of critical system actions for security analysis and compliance. Status: Passed Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules
	Generic: Meaningful Naming and Self-Documenting Code Objective: Ensure all identifiers clearly express their purpose and intent, making code self-documenting Status: Passed Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules
	Generic: Secure Error Handling Objective: To prevent the leakage of sensitive system information through error messages while providing sufficient detail for internal debugging. Status: Passed Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules
	Generic: Secure Logging Practices Objective: To ensure logs are useful for debugging and auditing without exposing sensitive information like PII, PHI, or cardholder data. Status: Passed Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules
	Generic: Security-First Input Validation and Data Handling Objective: Ensure all data inputs are validated, sanitized, and handled securely to prevent vulnerabilities Status: Passed Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules
⚪	Generic: Robust Error Handling and Edge Case Management Objective: Ensure comprehensive error handling that provides meaningful context and graceful degradation Status: No error handling: The new example adds a file open call without demonstrating any error handling for missing or unreadable files, which may encourage patterns lacking edge-case management. Referred Code with open("path/to/run-results.json", "r") as fp: run_results_dict = json.load(fp) run_results_obj = parse_run_results(run_results=run_results_dict) Learn more about managing compliance generic rules or creating your own custom rules

Compliance status legend

🟢 - Fully Compliant
🟡 - Partial Compliant
🔴 - Not Compliant
⚪ - Requires Further Human Verification
🏷️ - Compliance label

[qodo-code-review]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

No code suggestions found for the PR.

[yu-iskw]

Thank you for the contribution!