codeguard-astro

Astro Codeguard Gate

Goal: turn "looks fine" into repeatable tool evidence, and honestly distinguish pass, fail, unverifiable, and planned.

Start in 30 seconds

1. At the repository root, confirm 无专用标记文件 or the target file exists.
2. Detect tools:npx --no-install eslint --version。
3. First do a read-only check:npx --no-install eslint .。
4. Classify results as: code violations, missing configuration, missing tools, tool internal errors.
5. Only perform safe fixes:npx eslint . --fix。
6. Rerun lint, and execute the project's existing test/build gates.

Can directly propose:

• "Check this Astro project, don't modify anything yet, and give me a classification of lint failures."
• "Only fix Astro formatting issues, and list semantic issues first."
• "Verify Astro lint, test, and build evidence before committing."

Capability boundaries

✅ Good at handling

1. Identify Astro workspaces based on .astro and project markers.
2. Execute npx --no-install eslint . and preserve exit codes, scope, and tool versions.
3. Distinguish format, static rules, configuration, dependency, and environment failures.
4. Use npx eslint . --fix to handle reversible issues and rescan.
5. Report local results separately from CI/build/test evidence.

⚠️ Requires conditions

1. The target tool must already be installed and its version compatible with the project constraints.
2. Must be executed from the correct repository or module root directory.
3. If the project has custom configuration, the committed configuration prevails.
4. Whether generated code, vendor, and cache directories are scanned must follow repository rules.

❌ Not applicable

1. Do not treat formatter passing as compilation, test, or security audit passing.
2. Do not silently install tools, upgrade dependencies, or modify team rules.
3. Do not use suppress/ignore/raising thresholds to hide real issues.
4. Do not claim "check passed" when tools or configuration are missing.

When to use

• The user asks to check or fix Astro code standards.
• AI modified .astro, and pre-commit verification is needed.
• CI shows failures related to npx --no-install eslint . .
• Need to determine whether an issue can be fixed automatically or must be handled manually.

When not to use

• The main task is learning language syntax, framework design, or business modeling, so the corresponding language professional skill should be used instead.
• The main task is dependency vulnerabilities, security auditing, or license governance, so a dedicated security skill should be used.
• When the user only asks to explain one error and there is no project context, first provide a local explanation and do not claim the entire repository is green.

Data and security

This skill does not collect, upload, send, or store user code and credentials. By default, it only reads local repository configuration and runs local tools; it does not install dependencies online and does not record tokens, passwords, or private source code. Before any automatic fix, check the diff first; destructive or large-scale changes must be explicitly confirmed by the user.

Execution Contract

Item	Current Facts
Status	stable(since Codeguard V0.4)
File Extension	.astro
Project Marker	No dedicated marker file
Integration Configuration	eslint.config.js, eslint.config.mjs, eslint.config.cjs, eslint.config.ts, .eslintrc.json, .eslintrc.js, .eslintrc.yml, .pre-commit-config.yaml
Tool Preparation	eslint-plugin-astro
Detection Command	npx --no-install eslint --version
lint	npx --no-install eslint .
format/fix	npx eslint . --fix
Project-level gate	npx --no-install eslint .

Standard Workflow

Step 1: Determine the Real Scope

Confirm the repository root, module roots, generated directories, vendor directories, and user-specified files. For multi-module projects, first list the modules to be scanned; do not guess based on the current directory.

Step 2: Read the Project Contract

Read eslint.config.js, eslint.config.mjs, eslint.config.cjs, eslint.config.ts, .eslintrc.json, .eslintrc.js, .eslintrc.yml, .pre-commit-config.yaml and the actual commands in CI. Repository configuration takes precedence over the examples in this skill; if the two conflict, report the difference first.

Step 3: Detect Tools and Versions

Run npx --no-install eslint --version. Missing tools, incompatible versions, or configurations that cannot be loaded are all recorded as "unable to verify", not as passing.

Step 4: Perform Read-Only Checks

Run npx --no-install eslint ., and record the command, working directory, exit code, tool version, and first actionable error.

Step 5: Failure Classification

Type	Typical Signal	Handling
Format	Indentation, whitespace, import order	Formatter allowed, then inspect the diff
Static Rules	unused, complexity, naming, dangerous APIs	Minimal semantic fixes; no batch guessing
Configuration	parser/config/schema not found	Fix integration or report prerequisites
Environment	command not found, version conflict	Report installation/version requirements; do not install silently
Tool Internal Error	crash, timeout, parser exception	Preserve raw evidence and narrow the reproduction scope

Step 6: Controlled Fixes

Prefer running npx eslint . --fix. Handle only issues that are certain and reversible; dependency upgrades, rule exemptions, generated files, and business semantic changes must be explained separately.

Step 7: Verification Loop

Re-run the same lint command, then run the project's existing tests and build. Write "pass" only when the command, scope, and exit code are all clear; otherwise write "not run" or "unable to verify".

Rules

1. Re-verify with the same command: after fixing, you must re-run the original command that triggered the failure.
2. Evidence layering: report lint, format, compile, test, and security separately.
3. Minimal changes: do not refactor along the way, and do not expand style fixes into business rewrites.
4. Configuration first: do not override the project's existing ignore, dialect, target, or version constraints.
5. No fabrication: tools not run, configurations not seen, and platforms not verified must be clearly marked.

Output Template

Astro Codeguard 结果
- 范围：<仓库/模块/文件>
- 工具：<名称与版本>
- 命令：<实际命令>
- 状态：PASS / FAIL / UNVERIFIED / PLANNED
- 发现：<按格式/规则/配置/环境分类>
- 修改：<文件与原因；无修改写 none>
- 复验：<命令、退出码>
- 未验证：<测试/构建/平台差异>

Gotchas

1. A missing tool is not a pass — you must output UNVERIFIED and a clear preparation method.
2. A formatter is not a linter — all-green formatting cannot override static rule or compilation errors.
3. The root directory determines the result — Running in the wrong module may miss detection or load the wrong configuration.
4. Placeholders are not literal arguments — {file} and must be replaced with real, authorized paths.
5. Automatic fixes may expand the diff — after fixing, review the diff first, then run the regression gate.
6. Generated and vendor directories require an explicit policy — do not arbitrarily scan or modify third-party content across the entire repository.

Domain pitfalls and fixes

1. Domain pitfalls — Astro files require a dedicated parser; checking only the script section does not mean the entire component passes.

When information is insufficient

Do not just say "please provide more information." First give a safe read-only inspection plan, and list the specific items that still need confirmation:

1. Repository/module root directory;
2. Target tool and version;
3. Project configuration file;
4. Authoritative command in CI;
5. Whether automatic fixes are allowed.

FAQ

Q1: If the tool is not installed, can we conclude the code is fine? No. The status must be UNVERIFIED。

Q2: Can ignores or suppressions be added automatically? No. Exemptions are allowed only when the user explicitly accepts them and the reason is recorded.

Q3: Why does it still fail after formatting? The formatter only covers formatting; static rules, configuration, compilation, and tests still need to be handled separately.

Q4: Should generated code be scanned? By default, follow the repository configuration; if there are no rules, exclude generated/vendor first, then explain to the user.

Q5: How can we avoid changing too much at once? First fix in batches by failure category and file; rerun the original command and review the diff after each batch.

Q6: If it passes locally, can we say CI will pass? No. The CI version, environment variables, operating system, and command scope still need to be aligned.

Load resources on demand

• When encountering exit codes, failure classification, or exemption decisions, read references/rules/gate-rules.md。
• When you need to check this language's registry, toolchain, and project configuration, read references/tooling/toolchain.md。
• When you need copyable task examples, read by scenario examples/, and there is no need to load all of them at once.