/review-guards — turn review rules into guards
SkillDev toolsCodify project review rules as deterministic guards — ast-grep structural rules (with TDD-style rule tests) for mechanical checks, REVIEW_GUIDELINES.md for qualitative ones, wired into the project gate / wf verify. Use when the user wants to define review rules, turn a repeated review finding into a lint/guard, or set up ast-grep in a project.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the /review-guards — turn review rules into guards skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by tomsej/pi-ext in skills/review-guards/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Goal: a review rule stated once should never depend on a reviewer's memory again. Mechanical rules become ast-grep guards (exit code decides); everything else becomes written guidance reviewers receive automatically.
1. Triage each rule
| Rule kind | Destination |
|---|---|
Structural / mechanical ("no console.log outside logger", "every handler calls auth middleware", "no raw SQL in controllers") | ast-grep rule |
| Type-aware or flow-sensitive | existing linter / tsc config — do NOT emulate a type checker with patterns |
| Qualitative (naming taste, architecture judgement) | REVIEW_GUIDELINES.md in repo root — the /review extension and review subagents pick it up |
If a rule can't name a concrete AST shape, it is not an ast-grep rule.
2. Project setup (once)
sgconfig.yml # ruleDirs: [.ast-grep/rules], testConfigs: [{testDir: .ast-grep/tests}]
.ast-grep/rules/ # one YAML per rule
.ast-grep/tests/ # one test per rule: valid + invalid snippets
Requires ast-grep on PATH (brew package, already in chezmoi packages).
3. Write each rule TDD-style
- Write the test FIRST:
.ast-grep/tests/<id>-test.ymlwithvalid:(must not match) andinvalid:(must match) snippets — the invalid one is the exact code from the review finding that motivated the rule. - Write
.ast-grep/rules/<id>.yml:id,language,severity: error,message(say WHY, not just what),rule:(pattern/kind/inside…). ast-grep test --skip-snapshot-tests— must printRunning N testswith your test INCLUDED and pass. Pitfall: a test whose rule id does not exist is silently skipped (0 passed, exit 0) — the count is the proof the test ran. A wrong rule fails loudly (non-zero exit). Optionally pin snapshots withast-grep test -Uand drop the flag afterwards.ast-grep scanon the repo: every existing hit is either fixed now or the rule's scope is narrowed — never ship a guard the codebase already violates.
severity: error blocks (scan exits non-zero); warning reports only.
4. Guard candidates — what is worth codifying
Distilled from the ast-grep catalog, coderabbitai/ast-grep-essentials and semgrep-rules taxonomies. Offer these when the user asks "what guards should this project have?":
- Security (use the pack below first): hardcoded secrets (JWT/session/DB keys), weak crypto (DES/RC4/ECB, short RSA), cookies missing httponly/secure/samesite, JWT decode without verify, bind to 0.0.0.0, debug mode in prod code, insecure deserialization, XXE flags.
- Correctness traps:
awaitinsidePromise.all([...]), JSXcond && <X/>short-circuit with non-boolean, Godefer f()evaluating too early, empty catch blocks. (Flow/type-sensitive ones — floating promises — belong to the typed linter, not patterns.) - Project conventions: console vs logger (allow in catch), layer
boundaries ("no DB/fetch in handlers/components"), import hygiene (no
barrel imports, forbidden deep imports), deprecated internal APIs during
migrations (rule doubles as
ast-grep scan --rewritecodemod). - Agent/LLM code (this codebase!): secrets interpolated into logs/prompts,
LLM output flowing into
exec/eval/shell, tool dispatch without allowlist, unbounded agent loops without budget.
Starter packs — vendor before writing
coderabbitai/ast-grep-essentials— security rules for 10+ languages, with tests. Plain ast-grep project: clone andast-grep scan --config <pack>/sgconfig.yml ., or copy the relevantrules/<lang>/security/*.yml(MIT) into.ast-grep/rules/.raxITlabs/agent-security-review— 58 rules for AI-agent code (prompt injection → sinks, MCP tool poisoning, denial-of-wallet).
Write a custom rule only when no pack covers it.
5. Adoption rules — why guards die
Established findings (Tricorder/Google CACM 2018, Facebook CACM 2019, Johnson et al. ICSE 2013): developers abandon noisy tools — keep effective false positives under ~10%; findings must arrive at review time, not in batch reports after merge (fix rates collapse); every finding must be actionable (message says why + what instead, next to the code).
In practice: severity: error only for near-zero-FP rules — everything else
starts as warning and is promoted after it survives real diffs without
noise. One noisy guard erodes trust in all of them: fix or delete it the
week it annoys, never "later".
6. Wire into the gate
One source of truth: add ast-grep scan (and ast-grep test if rules exist)
to the project's existing gate script / task runner — CI and wf both call
that. In a wf contract it is just a quick check:
verify:
quick:
- {id: guards, kind: hard, command: "ast-grep scan", timeoutMs: 60000}
Report
Rules created (id → what it guards), triage of rejected rules (where they went
instead), scan status on the current tree, gate wiring. Verification for the
user: ast-grep test && ast-grep scan — exit 0.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 72
- Forks
- 6
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
review-guards- Source
- github.com/tomsej/pi-ext