docs: strengthen git workflow instructions with numbered options

[marcusquinn]

Summary

Improve git workflow instructions in AGENTS.md with clearer numbered options for user prompts.

Changes

• Restructure git workflow section for clarity
• Add numbered options for branch creation prompts
• Improve user interaction patterns

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@marcusquinn has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 7 minutes and 43 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 68436d4 and 090ba39.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .agent/AGENTS.md

Note

.coderabbit.yaml has unrecognized properties

CodeRabbit is using all valid settings from your configuration. Unrecognized properties (listed below) have been ignored and may indicate typos or deprecated fields that can be removed.

⚠️ Parsing warnings (1)

Validation error: Unrecognized key(s) in object: 'path_instructions', 'path_filters'

⚙️ Configuration instructions

• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• You can also validate your configuration using the online YAML validator.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @marcusquinn, 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 refines the git workflow documentation in AGENTS.md to prevent accidental direct commits to the main branch. It introduces a clear, mandatory pre-edit check with numbered options for branch creation, ensuring that users follow best practices for branching and pull request reviews before making any file changes. The changes aim to make the workflow more explicit and user-friendly.

Highlights

• Mandatory Pre-Edit Git Check: Introduced a new mandatory section at the beginning of AGENTS.md that outlines a pre-edit Git check. This check requires users to verify their current branch and, if on main, presents numbered options to create a new branch, use a different name, or proceed on main (not recommended).
• Improved User Interaction for Branching: The instructions now explicitly state that user prompts for branch creation should always use numbered options (1, 2, 3...) and never rely on 'Enter to confirm', ensuring clear and explicit user input.
• Streamlined Git Workflow Documentation: The 'Critical Rules' and 'Git Workflow (File Changes)' sections have been updated to reference the new mandatory pre-edit check, removing redundant instructions and improving the overall clarity and flow of the git workflow documentation.

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. ↩

[marcusquinn]

Closing: changes already in main

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request significantly improves the clarity and robustness of the git workflow instructions in AGENTS.md. Centralizing the mandatory pre-edit check and using clear, numbered options is a great enhancement. I have one suggestion to make the instructions even more explicit for an automated agent by detailing the actions for each user choice, which will help prevent any ambiguity in the workflow.

[gemini-code-assist]

The current linear steps 3 and 4 can be ambiguous for an automated agent. The action to take depends on which of the three options the user selects. Specifically, step 4 only applies to options 1 and 2, and the process for option 2 (using a different branch name) is not fully specified (e.g., prompting for the name). It would be more robust to explicitly outline the procedure for each choice to avoid incorrect behavior, such as attempting to rename the session when staying on main.

Suggested change

	3. **Do NOT proceed until user replies with 1, 2, or 3**
	4. After creating branch, call `session-rename_sync_branch` tool
	3. **Handle the user's response:**
	- **If 1 (Create suggested branch):** Create the branch, then call `session-rename_sync_branch`.
	- **If 2 (Use different branch name):** Ask for the new name, create that branch, then call `session-rename_sync_branch`.
	- **If 3 (Stay on main):** Acknowledge the choice and proceed on `main`.
	4. **Only after this check is complete, proceed with file edits.**