ci: add agnix validation to CI

[avifenesh]

Summary

• Add .agnix.toml configuration with repo-specific false positive suppressions
• Add agnix validation job to CI pipeline via reusable ci-agnix.yml workflow
• Validates agent configurations (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, skills, hooks, MCP, plugins) on push and PR

Test plan

• CI passes with agnix validation step
• No false positive warnings in agnix output

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces automated agnix validation into the continuous integration pipeline. The primary goal is to enhance the quality and consistency of agent configurations by automatically checking them against a set of rules. A new configuration file, .agnix.toml, has been added to define the validation scope and to suppress specific false positive warnings relevant to this repository's existing codebase, ensuring that only meaningful issues are flagged.

Highlights

• Agnix Configuration: A new .agnix.toml configuration file was added, including repository-specific false positive suppressions for various agent-related rules.
• CI Integration: Agnix validation has been integrated into the CI pipeline through a reusable ci-agnix.yml workflow.
• Validation Scope: The CI job will now validate agent configurations, including CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, skills, hooks, MCP, and plugins, on every push and pull request.

Changelog

• .agnix.toml
  • Added a new configuration file for agnix validation, defining rules and exclusions specific to this repository.

Ignored Files

• Ignored by pattern: .github/workflows/** (1)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml

Activity

• No human activity has been recorded on this pull request yet.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces agnix validation by adding a .agnix.toml configuration file. The configuration, including the suppression of certain rules with justifications, appears sound. I've included one suggestion to improve the maintainability of the configuration file.

_{Note: Security Review has been skipped due to the limited scope of the PR.}

[gemini-code-assist]

For better readability and to make it easier to find rules as this list grows, please consider sorting the disabled_rules alphabetically by rule ID. I've also preserved the comment alignment.

Suggested change

	disabled_rules = [
	"PE-001", # Auto-generated CLAUDE.md - rule placement controlled by agent-core template
	"PE-005", # "Be concise" is ecosystem-wide boilerplate from agent-core sync
	"CC-MEM-005", # Same as PE-005 for Claude-specific rules
	"CC-MEM-006", # Negative instructions (NEVER/Do not) are ecosystem standard critical rules
	"CC-MEM-008", # Duplicate of PE-001 for Claude memory files
	"CC-SK-017", # Intentional - version is a client-specific frontmatter field
	"XP-003", # Intentional - lib/cross-platform/RESEARCH.md documents all platform paths
	"CC-MEM-004", # npm validate referenced in auto-generated CLAUDE.md (agent-core template issue)
	"CC-AG-009", # False positive - LSP is a valid Claude Code tool (Language Server Protocol)
	]
	disabled_rules = [
	"CC-AG-009", # False positive - LSP is a valid Claude Code tool (Language Server Protocol)
	"CC-MEM-004", # npm validate referenced in auto-generated CLAUDE.md (agent-core template issue)
	"CC-MEM-005", # Same as PE-005 for Claude-specific rules
	"CC-MEM-006", # Negative instructions (NEVER/Do not) are ecosystem standard critical rules
	"CC-MEM-008", # Duplicate of PE-001 for Claude memory files
	"CC-SK-017", # Intentional - version is a client-specific frontmatter field
	"PE-001", # Auto-generated CLAUDE.md - rule placement controlled by agent-core template
	"PE-005", # "Be concise" is ecosystem-wide boilerplate from agent-core sync
	"XP-003", # Intentional - lib/cross-platform/RESEARCH.md documents all platform paths
	]