Feature Request: Automated KIT PR Review with Custom Business Rules

[memandip]

📝 Problem Statement

Manual code reviews often miss subtle violations of complex business logic. While standard linters catch syntax and style issues, we need a way to automate the validation of business rules and domain-specific constraints during the Pull Request process.

🚀 Proposed Solution

Integrate KIT into the GitHub Actions pipeline to act as an automated reviewer. This integration should allow KIT to analyze PR diffs against a set of custom instructions and business rules, providing feedback or blocking merges when violations are detected.

⚙️ Technical Requirements

1. Flexible Configuration Format

To accommodate different project needs, the configuration for KIT (instructions/rules) should support:

• Formats: YAML, JSON, or Markdown.
• Source: * File-based: Stored directly in the repository (e.g., .github/kit-rules.md).
  • Environment-based: Passed via GitHub Variables or Secrets for sensitive or organization-wide rules.

2. Configurable Context Window

• Default Behavior: KIT should focus only on the files that have been modified in the PR (the diff) to remain performant and cost-effective.
• Extended Context: An optional configuration to allow KIT to scan the entire codebase or specific directories for deeper architectural context.

3. Workflow Integration

• The tool should run as a GitHub Action.
• It should be able to post comments directly on the PR lines where a rule is broken.
• It should support a "Failure" state to prevent PR merging if a "Breaking Business Rule" is detected.

💡 Example Use Case

Configuration (.github/kit-rules.yaml):

rules:
  - id: auth_check
    description: "All endpoints in /api/v2 must use the @Validated decorator."
    severity: error
  - id: naming_convention
    description: "Database migrations must follow the YYYY_MM_DD_description format."
    severity: warning

Workflow Behavior:

1. A developer submits a PR changing a file in /api/v2 without the @Validated decorator.
2. KIT runs via GitHub Actions, reading the YAML file from the repo.
3. KIT identifies the missing decorator and fails the CI check, leaving a comment on the specific line.

Proposed Workflow Example

name: "KIT Automated Business Logic Review"

on:
  pull_request:
    types: [opened, synchronized, reopened]

jobs:
  kit_review:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    permissions:
      contents: read
      pull-requests: write # Required for KIT to post comments

    steps:
      - name: Checkout Code
        uses: actions/checkout@v4
        with:
          fetch-depth: 0 # Fetches all history so KIT can see the diff

      - name: Run KIT Reviewer
        uses: kit-ai/review-action@v1 # Placeholder for the official KIT action
        with:
          # 1. Flexible Config Source (File or Secret)
          rules_path: ".github/kit_rules.yaml" 
          # rules_data: ${{ secrets.ORGANIZATION_BUSINESS_RULES }} # Alternative: load from secret
          
          # 2. Configurable Context Window
          # Options: 'diff' (default), 'full_repo', or 'directory'
          context_window: "diff" 
          
          # 3. GitHub Token for posting comments
          github_token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
          
          # 4. Failure Logic
          fail_on_error: true # If a 'Breaking Business Rule' is hit, the check fails

✅ Expected Benefits

• Reduced Human Error: Catches business logic flaws before they reach production.
• Faster Onboarding: New developers get immediate feedback on domain-specific rules.
• Consistency: Ensures all PRs are held to the same business standards automatically.

[tnm]

Closed as inscrutable.