codeguard-svelte

Svelte 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. Probe tools:npx --no-install eslint --version。
3. Read-only check first:npx --no-install eslint .。
4. Classify results as: code violations, missing configuration, missing tools, tool internal errors.
5. Only perform safe fixable items:npx eslint . --fix。
6. Re-run lint, and execute the project's existing test/build gates.

Can be proposed directly:

• "Check this Svelte project, don't modify anything first, give me the lint failure classification."
• "Only fix Svelte formatting issues, list semantic issues first."
• "Verify Svelte lint, test and build evidence before committing."

Capability boundaries

✅ Good at handling

1. Based on .svelte and project markers to identify the Svelte workspace.
2. Execute npx --no-install eslint . and retain exit code, scope and tool version.
3. Distinguish formatting, static rules, configuration, dependency and environment failures.
4. Use npx eslint . --fix 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 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 pass as compilation, test or security audit pass.
2. Do not silently install tools, upgrade dependencies or modify team rules.
3. Do not use suppress/ignore/raising thresholds to mask real problems.
4. Do not claim "check passed" when tools or configuration are missing.

When to use

• The user requests checking or fixing Svelte code standards.
• AI modified .svelte, needs pre-commit verification.
• CI has failures related to npx --no-install eslint . .
• Need to determine whether a problem can be auto-fixed 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 audit 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, do not claim the whole 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 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 V0.4)
File Extension	.svelte
Project Marker	No dedicated marker file
Integration Config	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-svelte
Probe 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 that will 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: Probe tools and versions

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

Step 4: Run read-only checks

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

Step 5: Failure classification

Type	Typical Signal	Handling
Format	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; narrow the reproduction scope

Step 6: Controlled fixes

Prefer running npx eslint . --fix. Only handle 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. Only write "pass" 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 a fix, the original command that triggered the failure must be re-run.
2. Layered evidence: lint, format, compile, test, and security are reported 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 explicitly marked.

Output Template

Svelte 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} 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. Generation and vendor directories require an explicit policy — Do not scan or modify third-party content across the whole repository at will.

Domain pitfalls and fixes

1. Domain pitfall — The Svelte parser and the ESLint major version must be compatible; a parse failure must not be downgraded to a skip.

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 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 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 content 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; for 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 must also be aligned.

Load resources on demand

• When encountering exit codes, failure classifications, 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 them all at once.