mirror of
https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git
synced 2026-03-09 06:02:22 -05:00
3c302b3af9
* reports/reports * reports/graphs * account balance * budgets * goals * reports stragglers * rules * schedules * table * bank sync modal * spreadsheet * inputs * cover menu * note * agent configs, and coderabbit review rule * Update VRT screenshots Auto-generated by VRT workflow PR: #6661 * fix test * rename to FinancialText * lint * Update VRT screenshots Auto-generated by VRT workflow PR: #6661 --------- Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
95 lines
4.1 KiB
Markdown
95 lines
4.1 KiB
Markdown
# CODE_REVIEW_GUIDELINES.md - Guidelines for LLM Agents Performing Code Reviews
|
|
|
|
This document provides specific guidelines for LLM agents performing code reviews on the Actual Budget codebase. These guidelines help maintain code quality, consistency, and follow the project's design principles.
|
|
|
|
## Settings Proliferation
|
|
|
|
**Do NOT add new settings for every little UI tweak.**
|
|
|
|
Actual Budget follows a design philosophy that prioritizes simplicity and avoids settings bloat. Before introducing code that adds new settings:
|
|
|
|
- Consider if the UI tweak can be achieved through existing theme/design tokens
|
|
- Evaluate whether the setting provides meaningful value to users
|
|
- Check if the change aligns with Actual's design guidelines
|
|
- Prefer hardcoded values or theme-based solutions over adding user-facing settings
|
|
|
|
## TypeScript Strict Mode Suppressions
|
|
|
|
**Do NOT approve code that adds new `@ts-strict-ignore` comments.**
|
|
|
|
The project uses strict TypeScript checking via `typescript-strict-plugin`. Adding `@ts-strict-ignore` comments undermines type safety. Instead, review should encourage:
|
|
|
|
- Fixing the underlying type issue
|
|
- Using proper type definitions
|
|
- Refactoring code to satisfy strict type checking
|
|
- Only in exceptional cases, document why strict checking cannot be applied and seek alternative solutions
|
|
|
|
## Linter Suppressions
|
|
|
|
**Do NOT approve code that adds new `eslint-disable` or `oxlint-disable` comments.**
|
|
|
|
Linter rules are in place for good reasons. Instead of suppressing them:
|
|
|
|
- Fix the underlying issue
|
|
- If the rule is incorrectly flagging valid code, consider if the code can be refactored
|
|
- Only approve suppressions if there's a documented, exceptional reason
|
|
|
|
## Type Assertions
|
|
|
|
**Prefer `x satisfies SomeType` over `x as SomeType` for type coercions.**
|
|
|
|
The `satisfies` operator provides better type safety by:
|
|
|
|
- Ensuring the value actually satisfies the type (narrowing)
|
|
- Preserving the actual type information for better inference
|
|
- Catching type mismatches at compile time
|
|
|
|
**Exception:** If you truly need to assert a type that TypeScript cannot verify (e.g., runtime type guards), use `as` but require a comment explaining why it's safe.
|
|
|
|
## Avoiding `any` and `unknown`
|
|
|
|
**Flag code that uses `any` or `unknown` unless absolutely necessary.**
|
|
|
|
The use of `any` or `unknown` should be rare and well-justified. Before approving:
|
|
|
|
- Require explicit justification for why the type cannot be determined
|
|
- Suggest using proper type definitions or generics
|
|
- Consider if the type can be narrowed or properly inferred
|
|
- Look for existing type definitions in `packages/loot-core/src/types/`
|
|
|
|
Only approve `any` or `unknown` if there's a documented, exceptional reason (e.g., interop with untyped external libraries, gradual migration).
|
|
|
|
## Internationalization (i18n)
|
|
|
|
**All user-facing strings must be translated.**
|
|
|
|
The project has custom ESLint rules (`actual/no-untranslated-strings`) that enforce i18n usage, but reviewers should actively flag untranslated strings:
|
|
|
|
- Use `Trans` component instead of `t()` function when possible
|
|
- All text visible to users must use i18n functions
|
|
- Flag hardcoded strings that should be translated
|
|
|
|
## Test Mocking
|
|
|
|
**Minimize mocked dependencies; prefer real implementations.**
|
|
|
|
When reviewing tests, encourage the use of real implementations over mocks:
|
|
|
|
- Prefer real dependencies, utilities, and data structures
|
|
- Only mock when the real implementation is impractical (e.g., external APIs, file system in unit tests)
|
|
- Ensure mocks accurately represent real behavior
|
|
|
|
Over-mocking makes tests brittle and less reliable. Real implementations provide better confidence that code works correctly.
|
|
|
|
## Financial Number Typography
|
|
|
|
Standalone financial numbers should have tabular number styles applied.
|
|
|
|
- Standalone financial numbers should be wrapped with `FinancialText` or `styles.tnum` should be applied directly if wrapping is not possible
|
|
|
|
## Related Documentation
|
|
|
|
- See [AGENTS.md](./AGENTS.md) for general development guidelines
|
|
- See [CONTRIBUTING.md](./CONTRIBUTING.md) for contribution guidelines
|
|
- Community documentation: [https://actualbudget.org/docs/contributing/](https://actualbudget.org/docs/contributing/)
|