dpnmw/agents
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/wshobson/agents.git synced 2026-03-18 09:37:15 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

style: format all files with prettier

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Seth Hobson
2026-01-19 17:07:03 -05:00
parent 8d37048deb
commit 56848874a2
355 changed files with 15215 additions and 10241 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

146
plugins/comprehensive-review/commands/pr-enhance.md
View File

@@ -3,9 +3,11 @@
You are a PR optimization expert specializing in creating high-quality pull requests that facilitate efficient code reviews. Generate comprehensive PR descriptions, automate review processes, and ensure PRs follow best practices for clarity, size, and reviewability.
## Context
The user needs to create or improve pull requests with detailed descriptions, proper documentation, test coverage analysis, and review facilitation. Focus on making PRs that are easy to review, well-documented, and include all necessary context.
## Requirements
$ARGUMENTS
## Instructions
@@ -15,6 +17,7 @@ $ARGUMENTS
Analyze the changes and generate insights:
**Change Summary Generator**
```python
import subprocess
import re
@@ -32,14 +35,14 @@ class PRAnalyzer:
'potential_impacts': self._assess_impacts(base_branch),
'dependencies_affected': self._check_dependencies(base_branch)
}
return analysis
def _get_changed_files(self, base_branch):
"""Get list of changed files with statistics"""
cmd = f"git diff --name-status {base_branch}...HEAD"
result = subprocess.run(cmd.split(), capture_output=True, text=True)
files = []
for line in result.stdout.strip().split('\n'):
if line:
@@ -49,18 +52,18 @@ class PRAnalyzer:
'status': self._parse_status(status),
'category': self._categorize_file(filename)
})
return files
def _get_change_stats(self, base_branch):
"""Get detailed change statistics"""
cmd = f"git diff --shortstat {base_branch}...HEAD"
result = subprocess.run(cmd.split(), capture_output=True, text=True)
# Parse output like: "10 files changed, 450 insertions(+), 123 deletions(-)"
stats_pattern = r'(\d+) files? changed(?:, (\d+) insertions?\(\+\))?(?:, (\d+) deletions?\(-\))?'
match = re.search(stats_pattern, result.stdout)
if match:
files, insertions, deletions = match.groups()
return {
@@ -69,9 +72,9 @@ class PRAnalyzer:
'deletions': int(deletions or 0),
'net_change': int(insertions or 0) - int(deletions or 0)
}
return {'files_changed': 0, 'insertions': 0, 'deletions': 0, 'net_change': 0}
def _categorize_file(self, filename):
"""Categorize file by type"""
categories = {
@@ -82,11 +85,11 @@ class PRAnalyzer:
'styles': ['.css', '.scss', '.less'],
'build': ['Makefile', 'Dockerfile', '.gradle', 'pom.xml']
}
for category, patterns in categories.items():
if any(pattern in filename for pattern in patterns):
return category
return 'other'
```
@@ -95,6 +98,7 @@ class PRAnalyzer:
Create comprehensive PR descriptions:
**Description Template Generator**
```python
def generate_pr_description(analysis, commits):
"""
@@ -150,10 +154,10 @@ def generate_pr_description(analysis, commits):
def generate_summary(analysis, commits):
"""Generate executive summary"""
stats = analysis['change_statistics']
# Extract main purpose from commits
main_purpose = extract_main_purpose(commits)
summary = f"""
This PR {main_purpose}.
@@ -166,10 +170,10 @@ This PR {main_purpose}.
def generate_change_list(analysis):
"""Generate categorized change list"""
changes_by_category = defaultdict(list)
for file in analysis['files_changed']:
changes_by_category[file['category']].append(file)
change_list = ""
icons = {
'source': '🔧',
@@ -180,14 +184,14 @@ def generate_change_list(analysis):
'build': '🏗️',
'other': '📁'
}
for category, files in changes_by_category.items():
change_list += f"\n### {icons.get(category, '📁')} {category.title()} Changes\n"
for file in files[:10]: # Limit to 10 files per category
change_list += f"- {file['status']}: `{file['filename']}`\n"
if len(files) > 10:
change_list += f"- ...and {len(files) - 10} more\n"
return change_list
```
@@ -196,13 +200,14 @@ def generate_change_list(analysis):
Create automated review checklists:
**Smart Checklist Generator**
```python
def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"""
Generate context-aware review checklist
"""
checklist = ["## Review Checklist\n"]
# General items
general_items = [
"Code follows project style guidelines",
@@ -211,15 +216,15 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"No debugging code left",
"No sensitive data exposed"
]
# Add general items
checklist.append("### General")
for item in general_items:
checklist.append(f"- [ ] {item}")
# File-specific checks
file_types = {file['category'] for file in analysis['files_changed']}
if 'source' in file_types:
checklist.append("\n### Code Quality")
checklist.extend([
@@ -229,7 +234,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"- [ ] Error handling is comprehensive",
"- [ ] No performance bottlenecks introduced"
])
if 'test' in file_types:
checklist.append("\n### Testing")
checklist.extend([
@@ -239,7 +244,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"- [ ] Tests follow AAA pattern (Arrange, Act, Assert)",
"- [ ] No flaky tests introduced"
])
if 'config' in file_types:
checklist.append("\n### Configuration")
checklist.extend([
@@ -249,7 +254,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"- [ ] Security implications reviewed",
"- [ ] Default values are sensible"
])
if 'docs' in file_types:
checklist.append("\n### Documentation")
checklist.extend([
@@ -259,7 +264,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"- [ ] README updated if necessary",
"- [ ] Changelog updated"
])
# Security checks
if has_security_implications(analysis):
checklist.append("\n### Security")
@@ -270,7 +275,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
"- [ ] No sensitive data in logs",
"- [ ] Dependencies are secure"
])
return '\n'.join(checklist)
```
@@ -279,6 +284,7 @@ def generate_review_checklist(analysis):
Automate common review tasks:
**Automated Review Bot**
```python
class ReviewBot:
def perform_automated_checks(self, pr_diff):
@@ -286,7 +292,7 @@ class ReviewBot:
Perform automated code review checks
"""
findings = []
# Check for common issues
checks = [
self._check_console_logs,
@@ -297,17 +303,17 @@ class ReviewBot:
self._check_missing_error_handling,
self._check_security_issues
]
for check in checks:
findings.extend(check(pr_diff))
return findings
def _check_console_logs(self, diff):
"""Check for console.log statements"""
findings = []
pattern = r'\+.*console\.(log|debug|info|warn|error)'
for file, content in diff.items():
matches = re.finditer(pattern, content, re.MULTILINE)
for match in matches:
@@ -318,13 +324,13 @@ class ReviewBot:
'message': 'Console statement found - remove before merging',
'suggestion': 'Use proper logging framework instead'
})
return findings
def _check_large_functions(self, diff):
"""Check for functions that are too large"""
findings = []
# Simple heuristic: count lines between function start and end
for file, content in diff.items():
if file.endswith(('.js', '.ts', '.py')):
@@ -338,7 +344,7 @@ class ReviewBot:
'message': f"Function '{func['name']}' is {func['lines']} lines long",
'suggestion': 'Consider breaking into smaller functions'
})
return findings
```
@@ -347,17 +353,18 @@ class ReviewBot:
Help split large PRs:
**PR Splitter Suggestions**
```python
````python
def suggest_pr_splits(analysis):
"""
Suggest how to split large PRs
"""
stats = analysis['change_statistics']
# Check if PR is too large
if stats['files_changed'] > 20 or stats['insertions'] + stats['deletions'] > 1000:
suggestions = analyze_split_opportunities(analysis)
return f"""
## ⚠️ Large PR Detected
@@ -386,21 +393,22 @@ git checkout -b feature/part-2
git cherry-pick <commit-hashes-for-part-2>
git push origin feature/part-2
# Create PR for part 2
```
````
"""
return ""
def analyze_split_opportunities(analysis):
"""Find logical units for splitting"""
suggestions = []
"""Find logical units for splitting"""
suggestions = []
# Group by feature areas
feature_groups = defaultdict(list)
for file in analysis['files_changed']:
feature = extract_feature_area(file['filename'])
feature_groups[feature].append(file)
# Suggest splits
for feature, files in feature_groups.items():
if len(files) >= 5:
@@ -409,9 +417,10 @@ def analyze_split_opportunities(analysis):
'files': files,
'reason': f"Isolated changes to {feature} feature"
})
return suggestions
```
````
### 6. Visual Diff Enhancement
@@ -433,25 +442,27 @@ graph LR
A1[Component A] --> B1[Component B]
B1 --> C1[Database]
end
subgraph "After"
A2[Component A] --> B2[Component B]
B2 --> C2[Database]
B2 --> D2[New Cache Layer]
A2 --> E2[New API Gateway]
end
style D2 fill:#90EE90
style E2 fill:#90EE90
```
````
### Key Changes:
1. Added caching layer for performance
2. Introduced API gateway for better routing
3. Refactored component communication
"""
return ""
```
"""
return ""
````
### 7. Test Coverage Report
@@ -466,9 +477,9 @@ def generate_coverage_report(base_branch='main'):
# Get coverage before and after
before_coverage = get_coverage_for_branch(base_branch)
after_coverage = get_coverage_for_branch('HEAD')
coverage_diff = after_coverage - before_coverage
report = f"""
## Test Coverage
@@ -480,11 +491,11 @@ def generate_coverage_report(base_branch='main'):
### Uncovered Files
"""
# List files with low coverage
for file in get_low_coverage_files():
report += f"- `{file['name']}`: {file['coverage']:.1f}% coverage\n"
return report
def format_diff(value):
@@ -495,13 +506,14 @@ def format_diff(value):
return f"<span style='color: red'>{value:.1f}%</span> ⚠️"
else:
return "No change"
```
````
### 8. Risk Assessment
Evaluate PR risk:
**Risk Calculator**
```python
def calculate_pr_risk(analysis):
"""
@@ -514,9 +526,9 @@ def calculate_pr_risk(analysis):
'dependencies': calculate_dependency_risk(analysis),
'security': calculate_security_risk(analysis)
}
overall_risk = sum(risk_factors.values()) / len(risk_factors)
risk_report = f"""
## Risk Assessment
@@ -536,7 +548,7 @@ def calculate_pr_risk(analysis):
{generate_mitigation_strategies(risk_factors)}
"""
return risk_report
def get_risk_level(score):
@@ -637,7 +649,7 @@ So that [benefit]
| Performance | Xms | Yms |
"""
}
return templates.get(pr_type, templates['feature'])
```
@@ -650,7 +662,7 @@ review_response_templates = {
'acknowledge_feedback': """
Thank you for the thorough review! I'll address these points.
""",
'explain_decision': """
Great question! I chose this approach because:
1. [Reason 1]
@@ -662,12 +674,12 @@ Alternative approaches considered:
Happy to discuss further if you have concerns.
""",
'request_clarification': """
Thanks for the feedback. Could you clarify what you mean by [specific point]?
I want to make sure I understand your concern correctly before making changes.
""",
'disagree_respectfully': """
I appreciate your perspective on this. I have a slightly different view:
@@ -675,7 +687,7 @@ I appreciate your perspective on this. I have a slightly different view:
However, I'm open to discussing this further. What do you think about [compromise/middle ground]?
""",
'commit_to_change': """
Good catch! I'll update this to [specific change].
This should address [concern] while maintaining [other requirement].
@@ -687,11 +699,11 @@ This should address [concern] while maintaining [other requirement].
1. **PR Summary**: Executive summary with key metrics
2. **Detailed Description**: Comprehensive PR description
3. **Review Checklist**: Context-aware review items
3. **Review Checklist**: Context-aware review items
4. **Risk Assessment**: Risk analysis with mitigation strategies
5. **Test Coverage**: Before/after coverage comparison
6. **Visual Aids**: Diagrams and visual diffs where applicable
7. **Size Recommendations**: Suggestions for splitting large PRs
8. **Review Automation**: Automated checks and findings
Focus on creating PRs that are a pleasure to review, with all necessary context and documentation for efficient code review process.
Focus on creating PRs that are a pleasure to review, with all necessary context and documentation for efficient code review process.