Fix ur asset

[matafela]

Description

• Remove ur5 ee_link position offset.

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Checklist

• I have run the black . command to format the code base.
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• Public API changes are reflected in the API docs (python docs/scripts/check_api_docs.py), if applicable
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• Dependencies have been updated, if applicable.

[greptile-apps]

Confidence Score: 4/5

The asset update appears behaviorally safe, but the repository’s focused-test requirement must be satisfied before merging because the new UR5 case does not verify the frame-offset fix.

Findings

1.  UR5 Fix Remains Untested ▶

Fix with agent prompt

### Issue 1
tests/sim/motion/solvers/test_ur_solver.py:212-214
The new UR5 case inherits a solver-only FK → IK → FK round trip. Both sides use the same analytic solver, and the test never compares its pose with the URDF's simulated `ee_link`. Removing, retaining, or introducing an end-link offset in the asset would therefore produce the same assertions. This violates the repository requirement that bug fixes include a focused test proving the corrected behavior, so the requirement must be satisfied before merging.

Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!

---

For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.

Summary

• Keeps UR10 coverage while selecting model-specific URDF paths and joint-name patterns.
• Adds UR5 FK/IK round-trip cases.
• The added test does not independently validate the asset-frame correction it is intended to protect.

_{Reviews (1) · Last reviewed commit: "update"}

[greptile-apps]

UR5 Fix Remains Untested

The new UR5 case inherits a solver-only FK → IK → FK round trip. Both sides use the same analytic solver, and the test never compares its pose with the URDF's simulated ee_link. Removing, retaining, or introducing an end-link offset in the asset would therefore produce the same assertions. This violates the repository requirement that bug fixes include a focused test proving the corrected behavior, so the requirement must be satisfied before merging.

Context Used: AGENTS.md (source)

Knowledge Base Used: Motion planning and kinematics

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: tests/sim/motion/solvers/test_ur_solver.py
Line: 212-214

Comment:
**UR5 Fix Remains Untested**

The new UR5 case inherits a solver-only FK → IK → FK round trip. Both sides use the same analytic solver, and the test never compares its pose with the URDF's simulated `ee_link`. Removing, retaining, or introducing an end-link offset in the asset would therefore produce the same assertions. This violates the repository requirement that bug fixes include a focused test proving the corrected behavior, so the requirement must be satisfied before merging.

**Context Used:** AGENTS.md ([source](https://github.com/dexforce/embodichain/blob/main/AGENTS.md))

**Knowledge Base Used:** [Motion planning and kinematics](https://app.greptile.com/dexforce/-/custom-context/knowledge-base/dexforce/embodichain/-/docs/motion-planning-and-kinematics.md)

---

For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.

Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!

[Yuan-Xinyi]

lgtm