Skip to content

docs: clarify reviewer-enforced SRP/DRY expectations in AGENTS#22

Open
sidneyswift wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
chore/clarify-agents-guidelines
Open

docs: clarify reviewer-enforced SRP/DRY expectations in AGENTS#22
sidneyswift wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
chore/clarify-agents-guidelines

Conversation

@sidneyswift
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@sidneyswift sidneyswift commented Mar 4, 2026

What this updates\n- Adds explicit reviewer-enforced SRP/DRY rules to root \n- Defines PR-blocking expectations (barrel files, shared contracts, schema reuse)\n- Adds a pre-PR SRP/DRY checklist for coding agents\n\n## Why\nRecent review feedback showed that high-level SRP/DRY guidance was too ambiguous. This change makes reviewer expectations concrete so future agent-authored PRs align on first pass.\n\n## Scope\n- Docs-only change\n- No runtime code changes

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Added PR reviewer guidance establishing standards for code organization and development practices.
    • Introduced a pre-PR validation checklist for developers.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 4, 2026

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ba989768-0edc-44ad-8324-2ff5bf88be3f

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d4f1470 and d0c9047.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • AGENTS.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Added a new "Reviewer Expectations (PR-blocking)" section to AGENTS.md documenting SRP/DRY enforcement rules for PR reviews, including guidelines for barrel files, per-file responsibilities, shared schemas, and utility reuse. The content appears in two locations within the document.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Documentation
AGENTS.md
Added "Reviewer Expectations (PR-blocking)" section with SRP/DRY enforcement rules, barrel file guidelines, per-file responsibilities, shared schema management, and pre-push validation checklist. Content included twice in the document.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

A rabbit hops through AGENTS' tome,
SRP and DRY find a home,
With checklists clear and rules so bright,
Code review guidance shines just right! 🐰✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the main change: adding clarification of SRP/DRY reviewer expectations to the AGENTS documentation.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch chore/clarify-agents-guidelines

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@recoup-coding-agent recoup-coding-agent left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review: Clarify reviewer-enforced SRP/DRY expectations in AGENTS.md

Summary

Docs-only change. Adds a "Reviewer Expectations (PR-blocking)" section and a pre-PR checklist to AGENTS.md to make clear that SRP/DRY violations are blocking feedback, not style preferences.

Assessment

✅ Adds explicit, actionable guidance that was previously implicit.
✅ Checklist format makes expectations easy to follow before pushing.
✅ No code changes — zero production risk.

🔵 Nit

"Barrel-only index files" item mentions index.ts specifically — worth noting index.js / index.tsx if the repo uses those too, but this is very minor.

Verdict: approve

Clear, useful documentation improvement.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants