codeguard-lua

Lua Codeguard Gate

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

30-second start

1. At the repository root, confirm 无专用标记文件 or the target file exists.
2. Probe tools:luacheck --version。
3. First do a read-only check:luacheck .。
4. Classify results as: code violations, missing configuration, missing tools, tool internal errors.
5. Only perform safely fixable items:stylua .。
6. Rerun lint, and execute the project's existing test/build gates.

Can directly propose:

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

Capability Boundaries

✅ Good at handling

1. Based on .lua and project markers, identify the Lua workspace.
2. Execute luacheck . and retain the exit code, scope, and tool version.
3. Distinguish formatting, static rules, configuration, dependency, and environment failures.
4. Use stylua . to handle reversible issues and rescan.
5. Report local results and CI/build/test evidence in separate layers.

⚠️ Requires conditions

1. The target tool must be installed and its version compatible with 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 mask real issues.
4. Do not claim "check passed" when tools or configuration are missing.

When to use

• The user requests checking or fixing Lua code style.
• AI modified .lua, and pre-commit verification is needed.
• CI has failures related to luacheck . .
• Need to determine whether a problem 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; use the corresponding language professional skill instead.
• 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 do 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 and credentials. By default, it only reads local repository configuration and runs local tools; it does not install dependencies over the network, 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 fact
Status	stable(since Codeguard V0.5)
File extensions	.lua
Project markers	No dedicated marker file
Integration configuration	Based on the repository's existing configuration
Tooling preparation	luarocks install luacheck; cargo install stylua
Probe commands	使用命令查找与项目配置检查
lint	luacheck .
format/fix	stylua .
Project-level gate	luacheck .

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 the actual commands in the repository's existing configuration and CI. Repository configuration takes precedence over this skill's examples; if the two conflict, report the discrepancy first.

Step 3: Detect tools and versions

Run 对应工具 --version. A missing tool, incompatible version, or configuration that fails to load is all recorded as "unable to verify", not as a pass.

Step 4: Run read-only checks

Run luacheck ., and record the command, working directory, exit code, tool version, and the first actionable error.

Step 5: Failure classification

Type	Typical signal	Handling
Formatting	Indentation, whitespace, import order	Formatter allowed, then check the diff
Static rules	unused, complexity, naming, dangerous APIs	Minimal semantic fix, no bulk guessing
Configuration	parser/config/schema not found	Fix the integration or report the prerequisites
Environment	command not found, version conflict	Report installation/version requirements; do not install silently
Tool internal error	crash, timeout, parser exception	Preserve the original evidence and narrow the reproduction scope

Step 6: Controlled fixes

Run stylua .first. Only handle issues that are certain and reversible; dependency upgrades, rule exemptions, generated files, and business-semantics changes must be explained separately.

Step 7: Verification loop

Re-run the same lint command, then run the project's existing tests and build. Only write "passed" 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. 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 takes precedence: 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 explicitly marked.

Output template

Lua 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 cover up static rule or compilation errors.
3. The root directory determines the result — running in the wrong module may miss issues or load the wrong configuration.
4. Placeholders are not literal arguments — {file} 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 casually scan or modify third-party content across the entire repository.

Domain pitfalls and fixes

1. Domain pitfalls — Lua versions and host environments vary widely; Luacheck globals must match the runtime.

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 has no problems? No. The status must be UNVERIFIED。

Q2: Can ignore or suppression 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? Fix in batches by failure category and file, and rerun the original command and review the diff for 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 verify 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 everything at once.