Skip to content

Analysis of pre-commit instructions tool #1

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
google-labs-jules wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Analysis of pre-commit instructions tool #1

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Binary file added .coverage
View file
Open in desktop
Binary file not shown.
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions analysis_report.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
# Analysis of the `pre_commit_instructions` Tool

## Purpose

The `pre_commit_instructions` tool is designed to provide a standardized checklist of steps that should be performed before submitting code. This ensures that every change meets a certain quality bar. The key steps enforced by the tool are:

1. **Running Relevant Tests:** To verify that the code changes are correct and do not introduce any new regressions.
2. **Requesting a Code Review:** To get feedback from other developers on the changes.
3. **Recording Learnings:** To document any new patterns, solutions, or repository-specific procedures discovered during the task.

## Suggested Improvements

Here are some potential improvements for the `pre_commit_instructions` tool:

1. **Add a Linting Step:** A crucial step in modern software development is running a linter to ensure code style consistency and catch potential errors. The instructions should include a step to run a linter (e.g., `flake8`, `eslint`).
2. **Add a Documentation Check:** For changes that affect the public API or user-facing features, documentation should be updated. A step to check for necessary documentation updates would be beneficial.
3. **Provide More Specific Guidance:**
* For "Run Relevant Tests," the tool could suggest strategies for finding relevant tests, such as looking for test files with similar names or in a dedicated `tests` directory.
* For "Record Learnings," providing examples of valuable learnings (e.g., "a new library used," "a clever debugging technique," or "a project-specific convention") would make this step more actionable.
4. **Allow for Project-Specific Configuration:** The current instructions are generic. The tool could be enhanced to read project-specific pre-commit checks from a configuration file (like `AGENTS.md` or a dedicated `.pre-commit-config.yaml`), making it more adaptable to different projects' needs.
Loading