fusion-code-conventions

name	fusion-code-conventions
description	Applies and explains code conventions across TypeScript, React, C#, and Markdown. Enforces naming rules, file naming patterns, TSDoc and XML doc standards, inline comment intent (the *why*, not the *what*), code structure, error handling, async patterns, and dead code policy. Also enforces ADR and contributor doc decisions, and flags decisions that appear stale or misaligned with current tooling. USE FOR: convention questions, code review against project standards, applying naming rules, auditing intent comments, checking TSDoc completeness, enforcing recorded ADR decisions, and flagging stale architectural decisions. DO NOT USE FOR: security vulnerability scanning, performance profiling, runtime debugging, or generating net-new code without a review target.
license	MIT
metadata	{"version":"0.1.3","status":"experimental","owner":"@equinor/fusion-core","tags":["code-conventions","code-review","best-practices","typescript","react","csharp","markdown","intent","adr","constitution","naming","tsdoc","inline-comments"],"role":"orchestrator"}
compatibility	Works best in runtimes that support skill-local agents (6 agent modes). In single-agent runtimes, all convention checks run inline. Requires file-system access for project discovery (tsconfig.json, biome.json, .editorconfig, ADR directories). The constitution agent requires git CLI access for commit history checks.

Code Conventions

When to use

Use when code needs review, writing, or explanation against project conventions. Applies at two layers:

• Language conventions — naming, file naming, type system, TSDoc/XML doc standards, code structure, error handling, async patterns, dead code policy. Each language has a dedicated agent and authoritative reference doc.
• Cross-cutting conventions — applied on every review: intent capture (every non-obvious decision must be documented well enough that code could be regenerated from comments alone) and constitution enforcement (ADRs and contributor docs are law; deviations require a new decision record; stale decisions flagged).

Typical triggers:

• "what are the naming conventions for this project?"
• "how should I write TSDoc for this function?"
• "does this file follow our code style?"
• "review this for convention violations"
• "what comment style should I use here?"
• "is this idiomatic TypeScript / React / C# / Markdown?"
• "apply code conventions to this file"
• "are these inline comments good enough?"
• "does this violate any ADR?"
• "is this ADR still current?"
• "we have a CONTRIBUTING.md — check if this change follows it"

When not to use

• Security vulnerability scanning (use a dedicated security review skill)
• Performance profiling or benchmarking
• High-level architecture or system design decisions
• Generating net-new code without a review target
• Mutating files without explicit user confirmation

Precedence and applicability

This skill provides org-wide baseline conventions. When installed in a repository with its own conventions, precedence (highest wins):

1. Repository-level policy — CONTRIBUTING.md, contributor guides (contribute/), ADRs, .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, or equivalent
2. Tooling configuration — biome.json, tsconfig.json, .editorconfig, linter configs
3. This skill — all rules in references/*.conventions.md and agent modes

When a repository explicitly narrows, relaxes, or contradicts a rule from this skill, the repository policy wins. Don't flag code that conforms to repo's documented conventions, even if it deviates from the skill baseline.