本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開日本語紹介

plankton-code-quality

Claude Codeのファイル編集時に、Planktonで自動整形とコード検査を行う設定を支援するスキル。残った違反の自動修正や再検査、検査ルールの保護も扱います。

原文原文の説明を見る

Write-time code quality enforcement using Plankton — auto-formatting, linting, and Claude-powered fixes on every file edit via hooks. Use when setting up write-time formatting, linting, or auto-fix hooks on file edits.

インストール方法を見る

こんなときに便利

  • 編集のたびに整形・コード検査したいとき
  • 残った検査違反の自動修正を設定
  • 検査設定のルール緩和を防ぎたいとき
  • 複数言語の品質チェックを導入

日本語での紹介

できること

Claude Codeでファイルを編集するたびに、Planktonで自動整形とlint(コードの問題を見つける静的検査)を実行する設定を支援します。残った違反はClaudeの別プロセスへ渡し、内容の複雑さに応じてHaiku、Sonnet、Opusに振り分けます。修正後は再検査し、解消しない問題を元のエージェントへ返します。検査設定の改変を防ぐ仕組みや、CIで同じ検査を行う方法も扱います。

こんなときに便利

コミット時だけでなく、編集の直後に書式や品質を確認したい場合に向いています。Python、TypeScript、Shellなど複数の言語を扱うプロジェクトや、コード修正の代わりに検査ルールが緩められるのを防ぎたい場合にも使えます。

使い方の例

  • 「このプロジェクトにPlanktonの編集時フックを設定して」
  • 「残ったlint違反の自動修正と再検査を有効にして」

注意点

Planktonは手動で導入し、利用前にコードを確認する前提です。Claude Codeと、対象言語ごとの整形・検査ツールが必要です。標準のフックはPythonにuv、JavaScriptにbunを使うよう制限します。ECCと併用する場合はPrettierとbiomeの競合に注意が必要です。TypeScript/JSの複雑さの検査にはoxlint 1.37.0以上を使い、実測した値で上限を設定します。

この紹介文は、公開されている SKILL.md をもとに AI(Claude Haiku)が作成しました。正確な仕様は下の原文を確認してください。

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md12.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Plankton Code Quality Skill

Integration reference for Plankton (credit: @alxfazio), a write-time code quality enforcement system for Claude Code. Plankton runs formatters and linters on every file edit via PostToolUse hooks, then spawns Claude subprocesses to fix violations the agent didn't catch.

When to Use

  • You want automatic formatting and linting on every file edit (not just at commit time)
  • You need defense against agents modifying linter configs to pass instead of fixing code
  • You want tiered model routing for fixes (Haiku for simple style, Sonnet for logic, Opus for types)
  • You work with multiple languages (Python, TypeScript, Shell, YAML, JSON, TOML, Markdown, Dockerfile)

How It Works

Three-Phase Architecture

Every time Claude Code edits or writes a file, Plankton's multi_linter.sh PostToolUse hook runs:

Phase 1: Auto-Format (Silent)
├─ Runs formatters (ruff format, biome, shfmt, taplo, markdownlint)
├─ Fixes 40-50% of issues silently
└─ No output to main agent

Phase 2: Collect Violations (JSON)
├─ Runs linters and collects unfixable violations
├─ Returns structured JSON: {line, column, code, message, linter}
└─ Still no output to main agent

Phase 3: Delegate + Verify
├─ Spawns claude -p subprocess with violations JSON
├─ Routes to model tier based on violation complexity:
│   ├─ Haiku: formatting, imports, style (E/W/F codes) — 120s timeout
│   ├─ Sonnet: complexity, refactoring (C901, PLR codes, oxlint complexity) — 300s timeout
│   └─ Opus: type system, deep reasoning (unresolved-attribute) — 600s timeout
├─ Re-runs Phase 1+2 to verify fixes
└─ Exit 0 if clean, Exit 2 if violations remain (reported to main agent)

What the Main Agent Sees

ScenarioAgent seesHook exit
No violationsNothing0
All fixed by subprocessNothing0
Violations remain after subprocess[hook] N violation(s) remain2
Advisory (duplicates, old tooling)[hook:advisory] ...0

The main agent only sees issues the subprocess couldn't fix. Most quality problems are resolved transparently.

Config Protection (Defense Against Rule-Gaming)

LLMs will modify .ruff.toml or biome.json to disable rules rather than fix code. Plankton blocks this with three layers:

  1. PreToolUse hook — protect_linter_configs.sh blocks edits to all linter configs before they happen
  2. Stop hook — stop_config_guardian.sh detects config changes via git diff at session end
  3. Protected files list — .ruff.toml, biome.json, .shellcheckrc, .yamllint, .hadolint.yaml, and more

Package Manager Enforcement

A PreToolUse hook on Bash blocks legacy package managers:

  • pip, pip3, poetry, pipenv → Blocked (use uv)
  • npm, yarn, pnpm → Blocked (use bun)
  • Allowed exceptions: npm audit, npm view, npm publish

Setup

Quick Start

Note: Plankton requires manual installation from its repository. Review the code before installing.

# Install core dependencies
brew install jaq ruff uv

# Install Python linters
uv sync --all-extras

# Start Claude Code — hooks activate automatically
claude

No install command, no plugin config. The hooks in .claude/settings.json are picked up automatically when you run Claude Code in the Plankton directory.

Per-Project Integration

To use Plankton hooks in your own project:

  1. Copy .claude/hooks/ directory to your project
  2. Copy .claude/settings.json hook configuration
  3. Copy linter config files (.ruff.toml, biome.json, etc.)
  4. Install the linters for your languages

Language-Specific Dependencies

LanguageRequiredOptional
Pythonruff, uvty (types), vulture (dead code), bandit (security)
TypeScript/JSbiome; oxlint (>= 1.37.0) when using complexitysemgrep, knip (dead exports)
Shellshellcheck, shfmt—
YAMLyamllint—
Markdownmarkdownlint-cli2—
Dockerfilehadolint (>= 2.12.0)—
TOMLtaplo—
JSONjaq—

Pairing with ECC

Complementary, Not Overlapping

ConcernECCPlankton
Code quality enforcementPostToolUse hooks (Prettier, tsc)PostToolUse hooks (20+ linters + subprocess fixes)
Security scanningAgentShield, security-reviewer agentBandit (Python), Semgrep (TypeScript)
Config protection—PreToolUse blocks + Stop hook detection
Package managerDetection + setupEnforcement (blocks legacy PMs)
CI integration—Pre-commit hooks for git
Model routingManual (/model opus)Automatic (violation complexity → tier)

Recommended Combination

  1. Install ECC as your plugin (agents, skills, commands, rules)
  2. Add Plankton hooks for write-time quality enforcement
  3. Use AgentShield for security audits
  4. Use ECC's verification-loop as a final gate before PRs

Avoiding Hook Conflicts

If running both ECC and Plankton hooks:

  • ECC's Prettier hook and Plankton's biome formatter may conflict on JS/TS files
  • Resolution: disable ECC's Prettier PostToolUse hook when using Plankton (Plankton's biome is more comprehensive)
  • Both can coexist on different file types (ECC handles what Plankton doesn't cover)

Configuration Reference

Plankton's .claude/hooks/config.json controls all behavior:

{
  "languages": {
    "python": true,
    "shell": true,
    "yaml": true,
    "json": true,
    "toml": true,
    "dockerfile": true,
    "markdown": true,
    "typescript": {
      "enabled": true,
      "js_runtime": "auto",
      "biome_nursery": "warn",
      "semgrep": true
    }
  },
  "phases": {
    "auto_format": true,
    "subprocess_delegation": true
  },
  "subprocess": {
    "tiers": {
      "haiku":  { "timeout": 120, "max_turns": 10 },
      "sonnet": { "timeout": 300, "max_turns": 10 },
      "opus":   { "timeout": 600, "max_turns": 15 }
    },
    "volume_threshold": 5
  }
}

Key settings:

  • Disable languages you don't use to speed up hooks
  • volume_threshold — violations > this count auto-escalate to a higher model tier
  • subprocess_delegation: false — skip Phase 3 entirely (just report violations)

Environment Overrides

VariablePurpose
HOOK_SKIP_SUBPROCESS=1Skip Phase 3, report violations directly
HOOK_SUBPROCESS_TIMEOUT=NOverride tier timeout
HOOK_DEBUG_MODEL=1Log model selection decisions
HOOK_SKIP_PM=1Bypass package manager enforcement

References

  • Plankton (credit: @alxfazio)
  • Plankton REFERENCE.md — Full architecture documentation (credit: @alxfazio)
  • Plankton SETUP.md — Detailed installation guide (credit: @alxfazio)

ECC v1.8 Additions

Copyable Hook Profile

Set strict quality behavior:

export ECC_HOOK_PROFILE=strict
export ECC_QUALITY_GATE_FIX=true
export ECC_QUALITY_GATE_STRICT=true

Language Gate Table

  • TypeScript/JavaScript: Biome preferred, Prettier fallback
  • Python: Ruff format/check
  • Go: gofmt

Config Tamper Guard

During quality enforcement, flag changes to config files in same iteration:

  • biome.json, .eslintrc*, prettier.config*, tsconfig.json, pyproject.toml

If config is changed to suppress violations, require explicit review before merge.

CI Integration Pattern

Use the same commands in CI as local hooks:

  1. run formatter checks
  2. run lint/type checks
  3. fail fast on strict mode
  4. publish remediation summary

Health Metrics

Track:

  • edits flagged by gates
  • average remediation time
  • repeat violations by category
  • merge blocks due to gate failures

Gabe's addition: oxlint complexity + ratchet ceiling (JS/TS)

Closes the JS/TS gap in the model-routing table above. Python complexity (ruff C901, PLR) already routes to Sonnet. JS/TS had no equivalent rule turned on by default.

Turn on oxlint's complexity rule when using it

oxlint's complexity rule (source: eslint's complexity rule, ported) lives in the "restriction" category, which oxlint does not enable by default. It must be turned on by hand. Verified against Oxlint's complexity rule (2026-08-27): default option is max: 20. The rule is available in oxlint >= 1.37.0.

The skill's Language-Specific Dependencies table keeps oxlint optional for TypeScript/JS generally. When adopting the complexity rule, use oxlint >= 1.37.0 and treat it as a required dependency. Add the rule to the supported oxlint configuration the project already uses (.oxlintrc.json, .oxlintrc.jsonc, oxlint.config.ts, or oxlint.config.mts). If none exists, create one; do not create a second configuration file in the same directory.

Measure the codebase's current worst complexity score before choosing the initial enforced ceiling. The template below is intentionally incomplete: replace <MEASURED_CEILING> with that score, optionally plus a small amount of headroom, before committing the "error" gate. Oxlint's default of 20 is a long-term target, not a safe universal starting ceiling.

{
  "rules": {
    "complexity": ["error", { "max": "<MEASURED_CEILING>" }]
  }
}

Replace the placeholder before running oxlint; it is not a valid numeric threshold until the repository has been measured. See the ratchet section below for how the ceiling gets set on a real codebase.

Model-routing row

Add oxlint complexity violations to the same row as the existing Python entry in the Phase 3 subprocess table:

├─ Sonnet: complexity, refactoring (C901, PLR codes, oxlint complexity), 300s timeout

Same tier as Python's C901/PLR. A complexity violation is a refactoring job either way, language does not change the model tier.

The ratchet-ceiling technique

Source: Hunk PR #861 (merged 2026-08-26, verified against the PR's own diff and description via the GitHub API, not paraphrased from memory). Hunk turned on oxlint's complexity rule with "error", { "max": 80 } in .oxlintrc.json. Their own worst score at the time was 78 (App), next was 76 (validateFileViewLayout). From the PR body: "This is intentionally an initial regression ceiling rather than the long-term target... so 80 adds enforcement without grandfathering or suppressions. The ceiling can be ratcheted downward as existing hotspots are simplified." And: "A global ceiling does not prevent a function below 80 from growing toward it."

The technique, as actually run in that PR:

  1. Measure the current worst complexity score in the codebase (oxlint reports it when the rule fires).
  2. Set the ENFORCED ceiling to a value at least as high as that worst score, not to oxlint's own default of 20. Add a small amount of headroom if needed so the initial enable does not fail CI on a score you have not fixed yet (hunk used 80 against a worst of 78).
  3. Commit that as "error", wired into the existing lint CI step. This is a real gate from the first commit, not a suggestion.
  4. Never grandfather. The ceiling is global. A function sitting at 40 today is not exempt, it still cannot cross the ceiling later. That is the whole point: catch growth, not just today's worst offenders.
  5. Never blanket-suppress. No per-file or per-function disable comments to make a violation go away. Fix it or leave it under the ceiling.
  6. Each time a flagged hotspot is refactored below the ceiling, re-measure the global maximum across the whole codebase. Lower the ceiling by hand only to a value that remains at least as high as every remaining function's score (plus any deliberate headroom). This is a manual step done as its own commit, not automated. It is how the ceiling moves toward the linter's real default of 20 over time instead of sitting at the codebase's worst score forever.

One caveat, stated plainly: the PR itself went straight from "rule off" to "error" enforcement in one commit. It did not stage through a report-only or warn-only phase first. Starting with the rule set to "warn" for one CI run before flipping it to "error" is a reasonable staging step if a team has never measured its own worst score and does not want a surprise CI failure, but that staging step is Gabe's own prudent practice, not something verified in hunk's PR. Say so if you use it, do not attribute it to the source.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

accessibility

無料日本語概要

Web・iOS・Androidの画面を、読み上げやキーボード操作に対応させ、ラベル、配色、操作対象の大きさなどをWCAG 2.2に沿って設計・点検するスキル。

  • アイコンボタンの説明を付けたいとき
  • キーボード操作とモーダルの点検
  • コントラストや操作対象の大きさの確認
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月12日 更新

agent-architecture-audit

無料日本語概要

AIエージェントの不調を、指示・記憶・ツール実行・画面表示など12の層から調べるスキル。コードやログを根拠に原因を整理し、重要度順の指摘と修正案をまとめます。

  • アプリ内だけで起きる不調を調べたいとき
  • 過去の会話が混ざる原因を調査
  • ツールの未実行や実行の誤報を確認
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月12日 更新

agent-eval

無料日本語概要

実際の開発課題で複数のコーディングエージェントを比較するスキル。成功率、取得可能なAPI費用、所要時間、繰り返し実行の安定性を測り、選定や更新後の評価に使えます。

  • 実際の開発課題でエージェントを比較
  • 新しいツールやモデルの導入前評価
  • エージェント更新後の性能確認
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月12日 更新

agent-harness-construction

無料日本語概要

AIエージェントが使うツールの種類や入出力、エラーからの復帰手順を設計・見直します。文脈の情報量も整理し、作業完了率や再試行回数で改善を評価します。

  • エージェントのツールや入力形式の設計
  • ツールの結果と次の行動を明確にしたいとき
  • 安全な再試行と停止条件を定めたいとき
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月12日 更新

agent-introspection-debugging

無料日本語概要

AIエージェントの失敗や同じ操作の繰り返しを記録し、原因の切り分け、小さな復旧操作、結果の報告まで進める手順を示して、根拠のある再試行につなげるスキル。

  • 同じツール操作を繰り返す原因の調査
  • 会話の肥大化による品質低下の調査
  • ファイルパスや環境の食い違いの確認
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月12日 更新

agent-introspection-debugging

無料日本語概要

AIエージェントが失敗や同じ操作を繰り返す原因を、エラーと実行状況から整理します。小さな復旧操作を試し、結果と根拠を引き継げる報告にまとめるスキルです。

  • エージェントの連続失敗を診断したいとき
  • 同じツール操作のループ調査
  • 情報の蓄積による出力劣化の点検
affaan-m/ECC27.8万2026年10月5日 更新

affaan-m のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する