codeguard-dart

Dart / Flutter Codeguard Gate

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

Start in 30 seconds

1. At the repository root, confirm that pubspec.yaml or the target file exists.
2. Detect tools:dart --version。
3. First perform a read-only check:dart analyze。
4. Classify results into: code violations, missing configuration, missing tools, tool internal errors.
5. Only perform on safely fixable items:dart format .。
6. Re-run lint, and run the project's existing test/build gates.

You can directly propose:

• "Check this Dart / Flutter project, do not modify anything first, and give me a classification of lint failures."
• "Only fix Dart / Flutter formatting issues; list semantic issues first."
• "Verify Dart / Flutter lint, test, and build evidence before committing."

Capability boundaries

✅ Good at handling

1. Based on .dart and project markers to identify a Dart / Flutter workspace.
2. Run dart analyze and retain the exit code, scope, and tool version.
3. Distinguish formatting, static rules, configuration, dependency, and environment failures.
4. Use dart format . to handle reversible issues and re-scan.
5. Report local results and CI/build/test evidence in layers.

⚠️ Requires conditions

1. The target tool must already be installed and its version must be 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, testing, 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 conceal real problems.
4. Do not claim "checks passed" when tools or configuration are missing.

When to use

• The user requests checking or fixing Dart / Flutter code standards.
• AI modified .dart, and pre-commit verification is needed.
• CI has failures related to dart analyze .
• Need to determine whether an issue can be fixed automatically, or must be handled manually.

When not to use

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

Data and security

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

Execution Contract

Item	Current Fact
Status	stable(since Codeguard V0.3)
File Extension	.dart
Project Marker	pubspec.yaml
Integration Configuration	pubspec.yaml
Tool Preparation	Built into Dart SDK
Detection Command	使用命令查找与项目配置检查
lint	dart analyze
format/fix	dart format .
Project-level gate	dart analyze

Standard Workflow

Step 1: Determine the Actual Scope

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

Step 2: Read the Project Contract

Read pubspec.yaml and the actual commands in CI. Repository configuration takes precedence over the examples in this skill; if the two conflict, report the differences first.

Step 3: Detect Tools and Versions

Run 对应工具 --version. If a tool is missing, the version is incompatible, or the configuration cannot be loaded, record it as "unable to verify," not as a pass.

Step 4: Run Read-Only Checks

Run dart analyze, recording the command, working directory, exit code, tool version, and first actionable error.

Step 5: Classify Failures

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

Step 6: Controlled Fixes

Prefer running dart format .. 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 Closure

Re-run the same lint command, then run the project's existing tests and build. Only write "pass" when the command, scope, and exit code are all explicit; 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. Layered evidence: report lint, format, compile, test, and security separately.
3. Minimal changes: do not refactor along the way, and do not expand a style fix into a business rewrite.
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

Dart / Flutter 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. Missing tools are not a pass — must output UNVERIFIED and an explicit way to prepare.
2. A formatter is not a linter — all-green formatting cannot cover static rules or compilation errors.
3. The root directory determines the result — running in the wrong module may miss checks or load the wrong configuration.
4. Placeholders are not literal arguments — {file} must be replaced with real, authorized paths.
5. Auto-fix may expand the diff — after fixing, review the diff first, then run the regression gate.
6. Generated and vendor directories need an explicit policy — do not arbitrarily scan the whole repository or modify third-party content.

Domain pitfalls and fixes

1. Domain pitfalls — dart analyze and Flutter widget/integration tests are different levels of evidence.

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 files;
4. The authoritative command in CI;
5. Whether auto-fix is allowed.

FAQ

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

Q2: Can ignore or suppression be added automatically? No. Exemptions can only be made 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? Fix in batches by failure category and file, and after each batch rerun the original command and review the diff.

Q6: If it passes locally, can we say CI will pass? No. CI's versions, 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 you do not need to load all of them at once.