| name | konjo-quality |
| description | Konjo Code Quality Framework — all gate definitions, thresholds, tools, and enforcement points. Auto-load when writing tests, reviewing code quality, refactoring, or when quality gate failures are mentioned. Applies the Three-Wall framework to prevent AI slop. |
| user-invocable | true |
Konjo Quality Framework — Agent Reference
Why This Exists
AI-assisted code produces 1.7× more logical and correctness bugs than traditional development (CodeRabbit 2026). AI agents change tests so broken code passes instead of fixing the code. AI self-review is architecturally circular — it checks code against itself, not against intent. This framework provides external ground truth via three independent walls that cannot be reasoned past.
The Konjo Critic (Wall 3) uses claude-opus-4-6 in a separate session. The builder has blind spots from the construction process; the critic comes in cold with a different capability profile to reduce correlated failures.
The Three Walls
| Wall | When | What | Blocks |
|---|
| Wall 1 | Pre-commit hook | Format, lint, dead-code scan, DRY (staged only), TODO scan | The commit |
| Wall 2 | CI / GitHub Actions | Coverage, mutation, complexity, size, docs, review | The merge |
| Wall 3 | Local only (disabled in CI) | Claude Opus adversarial review against 10 mandatory questions | The merge (when enabled) |
Hard Quality Thresholds (all enforced by CI)
| Metric | Hard Block | Target | Tool |
|---|
| Line coverage | ≥ 80% | ≥ 95% | pytest-cov |
| Mutation survival (changed files) | ≤ 10% | 0% | mutmut |
| Cognitive complexity per function | ≤ 15 | ≤ 10 | radon |
| Lint violations | 0 | 0 | ruff |
| Dead code warnings | 0 | 0 | vulture |
| Undocumented public APIs | 0 | 0 | interrogate |
| Function body length | ≤ 50 lines | ≤ 30 lines | radon |
| File length | ≤ 500 lines | ≤ 300 lines | wc |
| DRY violations (>10L, >85% similar) | 0 | 0 | dry_check.py |
| Silent error swallowing | 0 | 0 | grep / ast check |
| Known CVEs in dependencies | 0 | 0 | safety / pip-audit |
The Ten Review Questions (Wall 3 will ask all of these)
- Q1 Correctness — Does this code actually do what it claims?
- Q2 Coverage Blind Spots — What inputs would cause silent failure the tests won't catch?
- Q3 Dead Code — Any unreachable code, unused variable, commented-out block?
- Q4 Documentation — Every public API documented? Does it match the implementation?
- Q5 Error Handling — Any errors swallowed? Any bare except? Fallbacks that mask real failures?
- Q6 DRY — Any block of logic appearing >once at >85% similarity over >10 lines?
- Q7 Complexity — Any function >50 lines, >15 cognitive complexity, any file >500 lines?
- Q8 Security — Prompt injection? Logging sensitive data? Missing validation?
- Q9 Performance — Any O(n²) where O(n log n) is obvious? Blocking I/O? Unnecessary allocation?
- Q10 Konjo Standard — Is this seaworthy under 10,000 concurrent requests for 30 days?
Running the Gates Locally
ruff check . && ruff format --check .
python -m pytest tests/ --cov=. --cov-fail-under=80
vulture . --min-confidence 80
python3 .konjo/scripts/dry_check.py --staged-only
git diff HEAD~1 | python3 .konjo/scripts/konjo_review.py
