-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 130
chore(agents): add graphite-commit agent for conventional commits #3394
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
3 Skipped Deployments
|
More templates
@rivetkit/actor
@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers
@rivetkit/core
@rivetkit/db
@rivetkit/framework-base
@rivetkit/next-js
@rivetkit/react
rivetkit
@rivetkit/sql-loader
@rivetkit/engine-runner
@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol
commit: |
PR Review: Add graphite-commit AgentOverviewThis PR adds a specialized Claude agent to help users create conventional commit messages for the Graphite workflow. The agent analyzes staged changes and offers commit message options following the project's conventions. Strengths✅ Well-structured description: The frontmatter includes excellent examples showing when this agent should be invoked, which helps the main agent understand when to delegate to this specialized agent. ✅ Follows existing patterns: The agent structure mirrors the existing ✅ Alignment with CLAUDE.md: The agent correctly references the Graphite CLI conventions documented in CLAUDE.md (lines 55-59), specifically using ✅ Appropriate scoping: The agent correctly identifies common packages from the codebase structure ( ✅ Good UX design: The 3-option approach with explanations is user-friendly and provides flexibility while maintaining consistency. Issues and Recommendations1. Critical: Missing AskUserQuestion Tool ContextIssue: Line 38 instructs the agent to "Use the AskUserQuestion tool" but this may not be available in all contexts or may need specific formatting. Recommendation: Verify that the AskUserQuestion tool is available to agents, or consider using a different interaction pattern (e.g., direct output with instructions for the user to respond). 2. Potential Race ConditionIssue: Lines 12 and 47 emphasize "DO NOT run Recommendation: Add a brief explanation (e.g., "to avoid confusion with unrelated commits" or "to keep the agent focused only on current changes"). 3. Error Handling MissingIssue: The agent doesn't specify what to do if:
Recommendation: Add error handling guidelines, such as: ### Error Scenarios
- If `git diff --cached` is empty: Inform user no changes are staged and suggest `git add`
- If `gt c` fails: Show the error and suggest checking Graphite setup
- If merge conflicts exist: Advise resolving conflicts before committing4. Quote Escaping in CommandIssue: Line 40 shows Recommendation: Specify using double quotes or proper escaping: gt c -m "your-message"5. Consistency with Main System PromptIssue: The main Claude Code system (per CLAUDE.md) includes Claude attribution in commits ("🤖 Generated with Claude Code" + "Co-Authored-By: Claude"), but line 44 explicitly states "DO NOT mention Claude or co-authors." Recommendation: This appears intentional for Graphite workflow, but consider adding a comment explaining why this differs from standard - The commit should be ONLY the single-line conventional commit. DO NOT mention Claude or co-authors.
(Note: This differs from standard git commits to maintain clean Graphite commit history)6. Character Limit SuggestionIssue: Line 34 says "Keep it under 72 characters when possible" but this is a soft suggestion. Recommendation: Consider being more explicit about when it's acceptable to exceed 72 characters (e.g., "when technical terms or package names make it unavoidable"). 7. Testing ConsiderationIssue: No mention of how to test this agent works correctly. Recommendation: Consider adding a testing section or example usage scenario to help validate the agent behaves as expected. Minor Suggestions
Security Considerations✅ No security concerns identified. The agent only reads staged changes and creates commits, which are standard development operations. Performance Considerations✅ The agent appropriately avoids expensive operations like full repository scans and focuses on staged changes only. Test Coverage
ConclusionThis is a well-designed agent that will improve developer workflow consistency. The main concerns are around error handling and tool availability. With the recommended improvements, this will be a valuable addition to the project. Recommendation: Approve with minor revisions suggested above. Rating: 8/10 - Solid implementation with room for improved robustness. |
Merge activity
|

No description provided.