Skip to content

Comments

Add CodeRabbit configuration file (.coderabbit.yaml)#20

Open
anshulchikhale30-p wants to merge 1 commit intoAOSSIE-Org:mainfrom
anshulchikhale30-p:chore/add-coderabbit-config
Open

Add CodeRabbit configuration file (.coderabbit.yaml)#20
anshulchikhale30-p wants to merge 1 commit intoAOSSIE-Org:mainfrom
anshulchikhale30-p:chore/add-coderabbit-config

Conversation

@anshulchikhale30-p
Copy link

@anshulchikhale30-p anshulchikhale30-p commented Feb 21, 2026

Summary

This PR adds the standardized .coderabbit.yaml configuration file from the AOSSIE Template Repository.

Purpose

  • Enables consistent automated review behavior
  • Discourages verbose or boilerplate comments
  • Encourages concise, high-quality documentation
  • Aligns this repository with organization-wide standards

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Enhanced automated code review process with comprehensive quality checks
    • Automated pull request labeling and issue enrichment
    • Integrated pre-merge validation and security scanning
    • Support for multiple programming languages and development tools

Added configuration for CodeRabbit integration, enabling auto-reviews, issue enrichment, and various review instructions for multiple file types.
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 21, 2026

Warning

Ignoring CodeRabbit configuration file changes. For security, only the configuration from the base branch is applied for open source repositories.

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Introduces a new .coderabbit.yaml configuration file with 280 lines of YAML settings for IDE integration, PR review automation, auto-reply workflows, labeling rules, tool integration options, and language-specific review instructions across multiple programming languages and file types.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
CodeRabbit Configuration
.coderabbit.yaml
New comprehensive configuration file establishing IDE autocompletion, PR auto-reply, issue enrichment with automated labeling (bug, enhancement, documentation), auto-review triggers and policies, pre-merge validation checks, tool integrations (shellcheck, ruff, markdownlint, biome, eslint, and others), and language/file-type-specific review instructions for Python, Solidity, TypeScript, Bash, and documentation with security, performance, testing, and accessibility guidelines.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes

Poem

🐰 A config so clever, with rules stacked so high,
We automate reviews and let our checks fly!
From ruff to eslint, from paths to the tools,
This yaml-bound wisdom enforces all rules.
Now merges run smoother, the rabbits rejoice! 🚀

🚥 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 directly and clearly describes the main change: adding a CodeRabbit configuration file (.coderabbit.yaml). It is specific, concise, and accurately summarizes the primary purpose of the changeset.
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

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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added size/L and removed size/L labels Feb 21, 2026
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
.coderabbit.yaml (2)

217-217: Redundant single-element brace group in glob pattern.

"**/*.{py}" is equivalent to "**/*.py". The braces only add noise. Same issue at Line 260 with "**/*.test.{sol}".

🔧 Proposed fix
-    - path: "**/*.{py}"
+    - path: "**/*.py"
-    - path: "**/*.test.{sol}"
+    - path: "**/*.test.sol"
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @.coderabbit.yaml at line 217, Replace redundant single-element brace groups
in the glob patterns: change the pattern "**/*.{py}" to "**/*.py" and similarly
change "**/*.test.{sol}" to "**/*.test.sol" so the braces are removed and the
glob syntax is simplified; update the corresponding entries in the YAML where
these exact patterns appear.

170-197: NextJS (web) and React Native/Expo (mobile) instructions are mixed in the same block.

The **/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx} pattern covers all TypeScript/JavaScript files, but the instructions combine NextJS server/client patterns ("use client", static generation, API routes) with React Native/Expo-specific guidance (expo-secure-store, deep linking, PWA). These are distinct platforms with conflicting constraints (e.g., "use client" is irrelevant in an Expo app, and expo-secure-store is unavailable in a NextJS web context). This will produce false-positive review comments for whichever platform isn't in use.

Consider splitting into separate path_instructions entries scoped to the actual directories that correspond to each platform (e.g., apps/web/**/*.{ts,tsx} vs. apps/mobile/**/*.{ts,tsx}), or remove instructions that don't apply to this project's actual stack.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @.coderabbit.yaml around lines 170 - 197, The instructions block applies both
to web and mobile and uses the broad glob "**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}", causing
platform-specific checks to fire incorrectly; fix this by splitting the block
into separate path_instructions entries scoped to each platform (e.g., a Next.js
scope like apps/web/**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx} and a mobile/Expo scope like
apps/mobile/**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}), move NextJS-only rules ("use client", API
routes, static generation) into the Next.js entry and Expo-specific rules
(expo-secure-store, deep linking) into the mobile entry, and remove or
conditionally apply any checks that are not relevant to the project's actual
stack so reviewers don’t get false positives.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In @.coderabbit.yaml:
- Around line 67-68: The comment above the request_changes_workflow setting is
misleading: the schema flag request_changes_workflow: true causes CodeRabbit to
file formal "Request Changes" reviews that can block merges, not "just leave
comments"; either change the boolean to false to make the tool comment-only, or
update the comment text to accurately describe the blocking behavior when
request_changes_workflow is true—locate the request_changes_workflow entry and
adjust the value or the inline comment accordingly.
- Around line 153-165: Replace the invalid reviews.instructions key with
reviews.path_instructions and add a path: "**/*" entry to make the block global
(use reviews.path_instructions with path: "**/*"); also change the YAML
folded-strip scalar ">-" to a literal block "|" for the instruction text so line
breaks and bullet formatting are preserved, and ensure the instruction text is
properly indented under the path_instructions entry.

---

Nitpick comments:
In @.coderabbit.yaml:
- Line 217: Replace redundant single-element brace groups in the glob patterns:
change the pattern "**/*.{py}" to "**/*.py" and similarly change
"**/*.test.{sol}" to "**/*.test.sol" so the braces are removed and the glob
syntax is simplified; update the corresponding entries in the YAML where these
exact patterns appear.
- Around line 170-197: The instructions block applies both to web and mobile and
uses the broad glob "**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}", causing platform-specific checks to
fire incorrectly; fix this by splitting the block into separate
path_instructions entries scoped to each platform (e.g., a Next.js scope like
apps/web/**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx} and a mobile/Expo scope like
apps/mobile/**/*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}), move NextJS-only rules ("use client", API
routes, static generation) into the Next.js entry and Expo-specific rules
(expo-secure-store, deep linking) into the mobile entry, and remove or
conditionally apply any checks that are not relevant to the project's actual
stack so reviewers don’t get false positives.

Comment on lines +67 to +68
# Automatically request changes on the PR (just leave comments)
request_changes_workflow: true
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Misleading comment — request_changes_workflow: true does the opposite of "just leave comments".

The comment reads # Automatically request changes on the PR (just leave comments), but per the schema, request_changes_workflow: true means CodeRabbit will formally use GitHub's Request Changes review status and will only approve the PR once its comments are resolved and all pre-merge checks pass. This can actively block merges. If the intent is to only post comments without blocking, set this to false (the default).

🔧 If the intent is comment-only (no blocking)
-  # Automatically request changes on the PR (just leave comments)
-  request_changes_workflow: true
+  # Only leave comments; do not block the PR with a Request Changes review status
+  request_changes_workflow: false
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
# Automatically request changes on the PR (just leave comments)
request_changes_workflow: true
# Only leave comments; do not block the PR with a Request Changes review status
request_changes_workflow: false
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @.coderabbit.yaml around lines 67 - 68, The comment above the
request_changes_workflow setting is misleading: the schema flag
request_changes_workflow: true causes CodeRabbit to file formal "Request
Changes" reviews that can block merges, not "just leave comments"; either change
the boolean to false to make the tool comment-only, or update the comment text
to accurately describe the blocking behavior when request_changes_workflow is
true—locate the request_changes_workflow entry and adjust the value or the
inline comment accordingly.

Comment on lines +153 to +165
instructions: >-
- Verify that documentation and comments are free of spelling mistakes
- Ensure that test code is automated, comprehensive, and follows testing best practices
- Verify that all critical functionality is covered by tests
- Confirm that the code meets the project's requirements and objectives
- Confirm that copyright years are up-to date whenever a file is changed
- Point out redundant obvious comments that do not add clarity to the code
- Ensure that comments are concise and suggest more concise comment statements if possible
- Discourage usage of verbose comment styles such as NatSpec
- Look for code duplication
- Suggest code completions when:
- seeing a TODO comment
- seeing a FIXME comment
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major

🧩 Analysis chain

🌐 Web query:

CodeRabbit .coderabbit.yaml schema reviews.instructions field documentation

💡 Result:

reviews.instructions is not a valid field in the current CodeRabbit .coderabbit.yaml schema (schema v2). The reviews object in schema.v2.json does not define an instructions property. [1]

Use these instead:

  • Path-scoped review instructions: reviews.path_instructions (array of { path, instructions }). This is the schema-supported way to give “review instructions” for specific files/globs. [1][2]
  • Global tone guidance: tone_instructions (top-level string) to steer overall voice/style for reviews and chat. [1][2]

References:

  • Auto-generated config reference (updated 2026-02-11): see “Reviews → path_instructions”. [2]
  • JSON Schema (authoritative): https://www.coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json. [1]

Sources:
[1] https://www.coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json
[2] https://docs.coderabbit.ai/reference/configuration


reviews.instructions is not a valid schema field and will be silently ignored — use path_instructions with "**/*" instead.

Two issues compound here:

  1. Invalid field: The reviews object in the CodeRabbit schema (v2) does not define an instructions property. The only supported mechanism for review instructions is reviews.path_instructions with path-scoped blocks. For truly global instructions, use path: "**/*" as the glob pattern.

  2. Wrong YAML scalar: >- (folded-strip scalar) converts every newline to a space, collapsing the bullet-point list into one unreadable string. The | (literal) block scalar is required to preserve line breaks.

🔧 Proposed fix
-  # Review instructions that apply to all files
-  instructions: >-
-    - Verify that documentation and comments are free of spelling mistakes
-    - Ensure that test code is automated, comprehensive, and follows testing best practices
-    - Verify that all critical functionality is covered by tests
-    - Confirm that the code meets the project's requirements and objectives
-    - Confirm that copyright years are up-to date whenever a file is changed
-    - Point out redundant obvious comments that do not add clarity to the code
-    - Ensure that comments are concise and suggest more concise comment statements if possible
-    - Discourage usage of verbose comment styles such as NatSpec
-    - Look for code duplication
-    - Suggest code completions when:
-        - seeing a TODO comment
-        - seeing a FIXME comment
+  # Review instructions that apply to all files
   path_instructions:
+    - path: "**/*"
+      instructions: |
+        - Verify that documentation and comments are free of spelling mistakes
+        - Ensure that test code is automated, comprehensive, and follows testing best practices
+        - Verify that all critical functionality is covered by tests
+        - Confirm that the code meets the project's requirements and objectives
+        - Confirm that copyright years are up-to date whenever a file is changed
+        - Point out redundant obvious comments that do not add clarity to the code
+        - Ensure that comments are concise and suggest more concise comment statements if possible
+        - Discourage usage of verbose comment styles such as NatSpec
+        - Look for code duplication
+        - Suggest code completions when:
+            - seeing a TODO comment
+            - seeing a FIXME comment
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @.coderabbit.yaml around lines 153 - 165, Replace the invalid
reviews.instructions key with reviews.path_instructions and add a path: "**/*"
entry to make the block global (use reviews.path_instructions with path:
"**/*"); also change the YAML folded-strip scalar ">-" to a literal block "|"
for the instruction text so line breaks and bullet formatting are preserved, and
ensure the instruction text is properly indented under the path_instructions
entry.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant