docs: add Graphify code map - #299
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 42 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds Graphify ignore rules, documentation for viewing and regenerating the code map, and a generated Markdown report containing graph metrics, communities, relationships, cycles, knowledge gaps, and suggested questions. ChangesGraphify code map
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/code-map/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md`:
- Line 226: Update the report generator that emits the “Nodes” listing so
underscored identifiers such as __dirname and __filename are rendered as inline
Markdown code, preventing MD037 violations. Regenerate GRAPH_REPORT.md and
preserve formatting for other node names.
- Around line 7-8: Regenerate GRAPH_REPORT.md using the report generator so its
summary metrics match the generated hub list and detailed Communities section,
including the correct number of shown communities. Correct the extraction
summary so the inferred percentage is nonzero when 11 inferred edges are
reported, and ensure all repeated metric blocks remain consistent.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 19fa7853-f5b2-467a-b6b5-f9d338072ce2
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
.gitignore.graphifyignoredocs/code-map/README.mddocs/code-map/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.mddocs/code-map/graphify-out/graph.htmldocs/code-map/graphify-out/graph.json
| - 937 nodes · 2608 edges · 41 communities (35 shown, 6 thin omitted) | ||
| - Extraction: 100% EXTRACTED · 0% INFERRED · 0% AMBIGUOUS · INFERRED: 11 edges (avg confidence: 0.66) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Regenerate the report with internally consistent metrics.
The report claims 35 communities are shown, but the hub list contains 38 labels, while the detailed Communities section lists only 32. It also reports 0% INFERRED alongside 11 inferred edges. Fix the generator or regenerate the artifact so the counts and percentages agree.
Also applies to: 17-54, 98-102
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@docs/code-map/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md` around lines 7 - 8, Regenerate
GRAPH_REPORT.md using the report generator so its summary metrics match the
generated hub list and detailed Communities section, including the correct
number of shown communities. Correct the extraction summary so the inferred
percentage is nonzero when 11 inferred edges are reported, and ensure all
repeated metric blocks remain consistent.
|
|
||
| ### Community 32 - "Community 32" | ||
| Cohesion: 0.40 | ||
| Nodes (4): compat, __dirname, eslintConfig, __filename |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Format underscored identifiers as code.
Markdownlint reports MD037 on this line. Render __dirname and __filename as inline code (or escape the underscores), preferably in the report generator rather than by hand-editing the generated artifact.
🧰 Tools
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.23.0)
[warning] 226-226: Spaces inside emphasis markers
(MD037, no-space-in-emphasis)
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@docs/code-map/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md` at line 226, Update the report
generator that emits the “Nodes” listing so underscored identifiers such as
__dirname and __filename are rendered as inline Markdown code, preventing MD037
violations. Regenerate GRAPH_REPORT.md and preserve formatting for other node
names.
Source: Linters/SAST tools
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/code-map/README.md`:
- Around line 9-15: Update the regeneration instructions and accompanying commit
description in the README so they remain consistent: either make the workflow
check out and generate from commit 129dbecf, or describe the map as reflecting
the repository state at generation time. Ensure the documented provenance cannot
contradict the checkout analyzed by the commands.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 8653471f-1da4-41ad-b694-987563db02b3
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
.gitignore.graphifyignoredocs/code-map/README.mdpublic/code-map/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.mdpublic/code-map/graphify-out/graph.htmlpublic/code-map/graphify-out/graph.json
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- .gitignore
- .graphifyignore
| Regenerate the map from the repository root: | ||
|
|
||
| ```bash | ||
| graphify extract . --code-only --out public/code-map | ||
| graphify cluster-only public/code-map --no-label | ||
| jq -c . public/code-map/graphify-out/graph.json > /tmp/ants-graph.json | ||
| mv /tmp/ants-graph.json public/code-map/graphify-out/graph.json |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Keep the documented commit provenance aligned with regeneration.
These commands analyze the current checkout, while line 3 claims the map represents commit 129dbecf. Regenerating from a later checkout will silently invalidate that claim. Either pin the workflow to 129dbecf or change the description to state that the map reflects the repository state at generation time.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@docs/code-map/README.md` around lines 9 - 15, Update the regeneration
instructions and accompanying commit description in the README so they remain
consistent: either make the workflow check out and generate from commit
129dbecf, or describe the map as reflecting the repository state at generation
time. Ensure the documented provenance cannot contradict the checkout analyzed
by the commands.
1 participant
Adds a Graphify-generated code map for the repository, including an interactive
graph.html, aGRAPH_REPORT.mdsummary, and a queryablegraph.json. The browser-viewable map is served frompublic/code-map/graphify-out/graph.html, so it can be opened directly from Vercel previews at/code-map/graphify-out/graph.html. The map was built in code-only mode from commit129dbecf, so code extraction stayed local and had zero token cost..graphifyignoreand git ignore rules for local Graphify cache filesdocs/code-map/README.mdSummary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Chores