pi-lens-write-ast-grep-rule
Skill0 starsChanged 15 days agoISCView on GitHub
Use when writing a new pi-lens ast-grep rule YAML file — covers schema, drop path, gotchas, and NAPI runner constraints
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- apmantza/pi-lensword for word, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- apmantza/pi-lens★ 521100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository18 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- apex-performance-auditorSkill
- checkSkill
- context7-mcpSkill
- design-craftSkill
- framework-engine-stacksSkill
- guardrailsSkill
- hypermedia-engine-stacksSkill
- learning-curatorSkill
- okf-docsSkill
- pi-lens-ast-grepSkill
- pi-lens-lsp-navigationSkill
- pi-lens-write-tree-sitter-ruleSkill
- rust-systemsSkill
- scalabilitySkill
- select-modelSkill
- skill-authoring-visionSkill
- systems-auditorSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 27
Only error maps to semantic blocking and stops a turn.
- Very specific: line 54
If the post-narrowing residual is still tens of legitimate hits, stop and report the numbers instead of shipping at error.
- Very specific: line 155
Every relational suppression (a has/inside/not exclusion for a legitimate idiom) needs two fixtures per bound metavariable, not one:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Writing a pi-lens ast-grep Rule
Drop path: rules/ast-grep-rules/rules/<id>.yml
Same id as a built-in overrides it. Multiple rules per file: separate with ---.
Minimal template
id: no-foo-bar
language: TypeScript # PascalCase — see languages below
severity: warning # error | warning | hint | info — pick by evidence, see below
message: "Avoid foo.bar() — use baz() instead"
note: |
Longer explanation / fix guidance here.
rule:
pattern: foo.bar($ARG)Pick the severity by the evidence behind the rule, not by feel:
error— only with a documented zero-false-positive audit in thenote. Onlyerrormaps to semanticblockingand stops a turn.warning— a real finding with a known, bounded false-positive rate.hint/info— style opinions. They render as advisory text, never block, and lose the report budget to warnings when a report is capped.
Full policy and the error-promotion procedure: AGENTS.md's "Severity policy
(#1777)" section. Read it before shipping anything above warning.
Before promoting to error
Three things must all be true, and the rule's note must record them:
- A multi-corpus false-positive census, not a single-tree count. Run the
rule over pi-lens's
clients//tests/plus at least one real external codebase of the kind the rule targets, classify every hit, and put the table in the note. - Structural narrowing before exemption. Suppress a legitimate idiom
with a relational constraint (
inside/has/follows, scoped path globs), not with prose telling readers to ignore the hit. Narrow first — don't reach for a lower tier as the easy way out.no-non-null-assertionwas demoted tohint(0124608a), then reverted back towarningonce the same false positives were closed with a structural exclusion instead (b3e1fd79). - Self-scan wiring. Tag the rule
metadata.category: pi-lens-self-scansonpm run astgrep:self-scanholds this tree at zero in CI. Anerrorrule that never runs against pi-lens's own source is an unaudited claim.
If the post-narrowing residual is still tens of legitimate hits, stop and
report the numbers instead of shipping at error.
Language values
TypeScript JavaScript Python Go Rust Java C Cpp CSharp Kotlin Ruby Php
Rule conditions
rule:
pattern: foo($X) # ast-grep pattern — $X single, $$$ARGS multi
kind: call_expression # AST node kind (alternative to pattern)
regex: "secret|token" # regex on node text
has: # descendant must match
pattern: await $$$
not:
kind: comment
any:
- pattern: foo($X)
- pattern: bar($X)
all:
- pattern: $OBJ.send($$$)
- not: { kind: await_expression }Relational & constraint conditions — all supported (native napi, #206)
The runner matches every rule through napi's native engine (root.findAll({rule,
constraints})), fed by a faithful js-yaml parse. The full ast-grep grammar works —
nest freely; nothing is silently skipped:
rule:
kind: call_expression
inside: # ancestor must match
kind: function_declaration
stopBy: end # ↑ search ALL ancestors (default is direct parent)
has: # descendant must match (default: DIRECT child)
field: arguments # field constraints work
follows: # immediately-preceding sibling
pattern: const $X = $V
constraints: # metavariable regex constraints work
X:
regex: "Error$"⚠ has/inside default to the immediate child/parent (stopBy: neighbor). For a
recursive descendant/ancestor search add stopBy: end. This is the #1 migration
gotcha — see the has note in reference.md.
⚠ stopBy: end alone is not a boundary. It's a search-depth control — how far
the walk searches — not a stop condition; the any: kind list only decides what
CAN satisfy the match, not where the walk halts. To scope a relation to the
nearest enclosing function (or any other boundary), give stopBy its own rule.
See "Scoping to the nearest enclosing X" in reference.md (#1794 F1 — this bug
shipped twice in one window).
YAML quoting — REQUIRED (js-yaml will reject the rule otherwise)
The parser is a real YAML parser, so unquoted special chars throw and the rule is silently dropped:
❌ message: !!value to coerce boolean # `!!` is a YAML tag → js-yaml THROWS, rule dropped
✅ message: "!!value to coerce boolean"
❌ message: foo: bar baz # bare `:` → parsed as a nested mapping
✅ message: "foo: bar baz"
Quote any scalar starting with ! & * ? | > % @ ` or containing : #
Quote keyword-like kinds: kind: "true" (bare `true` becomes a boolean → invalid kind)Gotchas
❌ Overly broad patterns — filtered out automatically
$VAR $NAME $_ $X $EXPR (single bare metavar)
❌ PascalCase language is required
language: typescript → language: TypeScript
❌ $VAR inside strings — matches literal "$VAR", not a metavar
"from $PATH" → use tree-sitter or grep instead
✅ Test in playground: https://ast-grep.github.io/playground.html
✅ Schema + autocomplete: rules/ast-grep-rules/rule-schema.json
✅ Docs: docs/custom-rules.mdReference doc — read before writing a NAPI-runner-specific or hard-to-express rule
reference.md (same directory) covers: ReDoS-safe regex authoring, node-text
string-escape quirks, has/inside stopBy defaults (and when to override
them), scoping a relation to the nearest enclosing node with a stopBy
boundary rule, the -js twin dedup behavior (#657), boolean-parameter
matching across the TS/JS grammars, and precision-over-recall heuristics for
denylist-shaped rules. Read it when a rule isn't matching (or over-matching)
the way you expect, or before shipping a regex/has-heavy rule.
Testing a suppression
Every relational suppression (a has/inside/not exclusion for a
legitimate idiom) needs two fixtures per bound metavariable, not one:
- A same-binding valid case — the idiom the exclusion is meant to suppress, with the metavariable bound consistently (same receiver, same key).
- A mutation-guard invalid case — the same shape with the binding broken: a different key, a different receiver, or a boundary-crossing lookalike (the guard lives in the wrong scope). This proves the exclusion checks the BINDING, not just the pattern's presence somewhere in the file.
rules/ast-grep-rules/rule-tests/no-non-null-assertion-test.yml is the model: alongside the
get-after-has/pop-after-length valid cases, it fixtures a different-key
guard, a different-map guard, and an outer-function guard that must NOT
suppress an inner closure — each one red if the corresponding binding check
is deleted.
Corpus silence is not evidence. A valve with zero corpus hits needs
adversarial fixtures MORE, not less — redundant-unsafe-function targets
Rust, so it has no pi-lens corpus to census against, and its # Safety
valve still shipped an unbounded backward scan that over-suppressed real
detections, caught only by adversarial fixtures in review (00284bcc). A
documented blind spot (an idiom the rule knowingly can't distinguish from a
bug) becomes an invalid-direction fixture with a comment naming the gap,
never silence.
Regenerate the catalog doc with npm run docs:rule-catalogs after adding or
changing a rule — never hand-edit the generated catalog.
Validating a candidate rule against the REAL engine (not the warm MCP cache)
Live-binary discipline (AGENTS.md shape 16) applies here too: verify parsing
and match behavior against a real ast-grep run before you write it into a
rule note or a test fixture — a hand-written fixture pins a guess, not a fact.
# inspect how a PATTERN parses → find the node kind you actually need
ast-grep run -p 'x = false' --lang ts --debug-query=cst file.ts
# match by kind (──kind and ──pattern are mutually exclusive in `run`)
ast-grep run --kind required_parameter --lang ts file.ts
# run ONE rule from an sgconfig against a sample
ast-grep scan -c <sgconfig.yml> --filter '^<id>$' sample.ts
# run the fixture harness for one rule
ast-grep test -c rules/ast-grep-rules/.sgconfig.yml --skip-snapshot-tests --filter '<id>'
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

