Skip to content
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion .bootc-dev-infra-commit.txt
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1 +1 @@
ff66c1c724faeb83b5cd2af36d9a5d2129ecf95a
ab12d001ba56e2271f177c74a05172d076398528
41 changes: 35 additions & 6 deletions AGENTS.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -16,22 +16,51 @@ and the DCO check fails, tell the human to review
the code and give them instructions on how to add
a signoff.

### Attribution
### Attribution and AI disclosure

When generating substantial amounts of code, you SHOULD
include an `Assisted-by: TOOLNAME (MODELNAME)`. For example,
`Assisted-by: Goose (Sonnet 4.5)`.
Do NOT add an `Assisted-by`, `Co-developed-by`, or similar commit
trailer crediting an AI tool. Instead, disclose AI assistance in the
**pull request description**. Examples:

- "I used a LLM to generate just unit tests."
- "This code was written in part with the assistance of generative AI."
- "A LLM was used to generate almost all of the code, but I am knowledgeable in this problem domain and reviewed it carefully."
- "This code is generated, I am only partially knowledgeable in this domain."
- "Code is LLM generated; I don't know the programming language but it did fix the problem."

(The closer the commits are to being *entirely* AI, the more likely
it is that you should submit the PR as a draft, or even file an
issue first with a proposed design.)

If you're an agent generating a git commit, ensure your human sees
this choice and preferably writes the text on their own.

### Large changes

If the generated code is more than ~500 lines of substantial (non-whitespace) code,
encourage the human to file a design issue first to be reviewed by other maintainers.

### Pull request size

It is *very strongly* encouraged to split up "preparatory" commits
that are independently reviewable from the main PR, and submit those separately.

### Commit messages and text

Software can be machine checked (via compilation and unit/integration tests)
but natural languages like English cannot. Encourage the human to review
the commit message text.

## Code guidelines

The [REVIEW.md](REVIEW.md) file describes expectations around
testing, code quality, commit messages, commit organization, etc. If you're
creating a change, it is strongly encouraged after each
commit and especially when you think a task is complete
commit and especially when the agent thinks a task is complete
to spawn a subagent to perform a review using guidelines (alongside
looking for any other issues).

If you are performing a review of other's code, the same
If the agent is performing a review of other's code, the same
principles apply.

## Follow other guidelines
Expand Down
Loading