Status: Binding for coding agents
Coding agents follow all human engineering standards.
Additional rules:
- Read
principles.md. - Read
coding-standards.md. - Read specialized standards relevant to the change.
- Read referenced design/ADR material before implementing behavior governed by it.
- Identify the requested scope and applicable invariants.
- Stay within scope.
- Do not perform unrelated cleanup.
- Prefer the smallest coherent implementation.
- Do not add abstractions speculatively.
- Never use the
-(em dash) character in code, comments, documentation, or commit messages. - Do not weaken tests, lint, typing, goldens, or CI to make the implementation pass.
- Do not hide a design/reality conflict with a workaround.
- A PR body closing more than one issue uses one
Fixes #N(orCloses #N) per line, never a comma-separated list after one keyword: GitHub's closing-keyword parser only recognizes the first reference in a list, so anything after the first comma is silently left open.
If the requested design conflicts with the repository, runtime invariants, or another binding decision:
Stop that implementation path and report the conflict precisely.
Do not silently invent a new architecture.
Verify claims by running the relevant commands.
Do not trust existing comments, issue text, or PR descriptions when executable evidence is available.
Record non-obvious engineering judgments as they arise.
Do not reconstruct fake rationale after the implementation is already complete.
Coding agents optimize for:
- correctness,
- simplicity,
- clarity,
- maintainability,
- narrow scope.
Not for:
- maximum abstraction,
- maximum code produced,
- cleverness,
- generalized machinery without a demonstrated need.