refactor: wrap rules with application reasons in tuple structure #6359

sestinj · 2025-06-30T23:22:26Z

Summary by cubic

Refactored rule application logic to wrap each applied rule with its application reason in a tuple structure, making rule usage and debugging clearer across the codebase.

Refactors
- Introduced RuleWithApplicationReason type to pair each rule with its reason for application.
- Updated all rule application, storage, and test logic to use the new tuple structure.

netlify · 2025-06-30T23:22:32Z

❌ Deploy Preview for continuedev failed. Why did it fail? →

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`da6ad84`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/continuedev/deploys/68631c351c3f880008e93bf0

cubic-dev-ai

cubic found 6 issues across 7 files. Review them in cubic.dev

_{React with 👍 or 👎 to teach cubic. Tag @cubic-dev-ai to give specific feedback.}

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:50Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain(
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain(


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:51Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -159,17 +159,17 @@
      [srcPythonRule, utilsPythonRule],
      [utilsPythonFileContext],
    );
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:51Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:51Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -148,8 +148,8 @@
      [srcPythonRule, utilsPythonRule],
      [srcPythonFileContext],
    );
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain(
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Src Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:51Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:36:51Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@

    // Both rules should apply
    expect(applicableRules).toHaveLength(2);
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");


The test now assumes that each element in applicableRules has a 'rule' property with a 'name', which is a breaking change from the previous structure. If any test setup or code under test still returns the old structure, this will cause test failures or runtime errors. Ensure all code paths producing applicableRules are updated to the new tuple/object structure.

cubic-dev-ai

cubic found 6 issues across 8 files. Review them in cubic.dev

_{React with 👍 or 👎 to teach cubic. Tag @cubic-dev-ai to give specific feedback.}

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:16Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -159,17 +159,17 @@ describe("Nested directory rules application", () => {
      [srcPythonRule, utilsPythonRule],
      [utilsPythonFileContext],
    );
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:16Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain(
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain(


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:16Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -148,8 +148,8 @@ describe("Nested directory rules application", () => {
      [srcPythonRule, utilsPythonRule],
      [srcPythonFileContext],
    );
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain(
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Src Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:17Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:17Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ describe("Nested directory rules application", () => {

    // Both rules should apply
    expect(applicableRules).toHaveLength(2);
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Global Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Nested Folder Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Global Rule");


The test now assumes that each element in applicableRules has a 'rule' property with a 'name', which is a breaking change from the previous structure. If any test setup or code under test still returns the old structure, this will cause test failures or runtime errors. Ensure all code paths producing applicableRules are updated to the new tuple/object structure.

cubic-dev-ai · 2025-06-30T23:41:17Z

core/llm/rules/nestedDirectoryRules.vitest.ts

-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
-    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).not.toContain("Src Python Rule");
+    expect(applicableRules.map((r) => r.rule.name)).toContain("Utils Python Rule");


Same as above: this assertion assumes applicableRules elements have a 'rule' property. If the structure is not updated everywhere, this will cause errors. Ensure all code producing applicableRules matches the new structure.

Patrick-Erichsen

just one quick fix

assuming we'll follow up with UI changes to actually use these values?

Patrick-Erichsen · 2025-07-01T18:20:08Z

core/llm/rules/getSystemMessageWithRules.ts

+export type RuleApplicationReason =
+  | "alwaysApply"
+  | "implicitGlobal"
+  | "globMatch"
+  | "regexMatch"
+  | "globAndRegexMatch"
+  | "directoryMatch";
+
+export interface RuleWithApplicationReason {
+  rule: RuleWithSource;
+  reason: RuleApplicationReason;
+}
+


Suggested change

export type RuleApplicationReason =

| "alwaysApply"

| "implicitGlobal"

| "globMatch"

| "regexMatch"

| "globAndRegexMatch"

| "directoryMatch";

export interface RuleWithApplicationReason {

rule: RuleWithSource;

reason: RuleApplicationReason;

}

We already have this defined in index.d.ts

refactor: wrap rules with application reasons in tuple structure

da6ad84

sestinj requested a review from a team as a code owner June 30, 2025 23:22

sestinj requested review from Patrick-Erichsen and removed request for a team June 30, 2025 23:22

github-project-automation bot moved this to Todo in Issues and PRs Jun 30, 2025

github-project-automation bot added this to Issues and PRs Jun 30, 2025

dosubot bot added the size:L This PR changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jun 30, 2025

cubic-dev-ai bot reviewed Jun 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Patrick-Erichsen requested changes Jul 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

github-project-automation bot moved this from Todo to In Progress in Issues and PRs Jul 1, 2025

refactor: wrap rules with application reasons in tuple structure #6359

Are you sure you want to change the base?

refactor: wrap rules with application reasons in tuple structure #6359

Conversation

sestinj commented Jun 30, 2025 • edited by cubic-dev-ai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary by cubic

Uh oh!

netlify bot commented Jun 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

❌ Deploy Preview for continuedev failed. Why did it fail? →

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai bot Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Patrick-Erichsen left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Patrick-Erichsen Jul 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sestinj commented Jun 30, 2025 •

edited by cubic-dev-ai bot

Loading

netlify bot commented Jun 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Patrick-Erichsen left a comment •

edited

Loading