[kyle-sexton]

No related issue: rolls out the guardrails lefthook remote (claude-code-plugins#9504)

Summary

Runs the guardrails plugin's three git hooks in this repository from one lefthook remotes: entry, so every clone gets the same hooks from committed config and picks up upstream changes within 24 h:

• commit-msg-convention (commit-msg): the subject against the repository's commit convention (docs/conventions/source-control/commit-convention.yml).
• pre-commit-content (pre-commit): secrets and machine-specific paths on added lines.
• reference-verify (pre-push): CLI flags, /plugin:skill references and deleted paths on pushed lines.

Fix

• lefthook.yml (new; the repository had no hook manager): only a remotes: entry for https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins, ref: main, refetch_frequency: 24h, config plugins/guardrails/git-hooks/lefthook-remote.yml.
• Compared with the earlier revision of this PR, removed: the vendored .githooks/guardrails/ copies, the three local guardrails-* jobs, the shellcheck exclude: and the machine-specific-paths-exclude addition in .github/workflows/pr-require-checks.yml, and the ## subject_pattern section in .claude/source-control.md (main now carries commit-convention.yml). The ShellCheck exclude issue ci-workflows#871 is moot.
• No other change.

Verification

install.mjs verify --repo <worktree> (rc 0):

ok	commit-msg-convention
ok	pre-commit-content
ok	reference-verify

install.mjs plan --scope remote afterwards: no decisions left. This PR's commit and push ran the remote jobs (guardrails-remote-reference-verify passed on push).

Observation runs from the earlier revision still hold, since the remote runs the same hook scripts:

Hook	Observation	Findings	Classification
reference-verify	pre-push replay of origin/main~200..origin/main (86 changed .md/.sh/.ps1 files), 28 s	0 findings; 1 file not checked	tool noise / known upstream defect: .github/actions/pr-require-checks/aggregate-results/run.test.sh (138,358 bytes) exceeds the 128 KiB per-argument limit, so jq fails with Argument list too long and the file is skipped without a finding. Item 4 of claude-code-plugins#9426
pre-commit-content	each of the last 100 non-merge commits replayed into the index (update-ref HEAD c~1 && read-tree c; 424 staged files in all), 20 s total	0	none. A positive control (a staged /home/<name>/ path) blocks with rc 1
commit-msg-convention	subject_pattern tested against the last 500 subjects on main	0 non-matching	none

Related

• claude-code-plugins#9504: the lefthook remote config this points at.
• claude-code-plugins#9426: the rollout and its recorded design decision.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-24T04:02:45.963583Z	c5fd691	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 73f50948bc

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[claude]

Claude finished @kyle-sexton's task in 2m 52s —— View job

---

Security review complete

• Gather context (PR diff, changed files)
• Run /review:security-review criteria against the diff
• Post findings / summary

Scope: the only changed file is lefthook.yml (new, 6 lines), which replaces the PR's earlier vendored-hook-scripts revision with a single lefthook remotes: entry that pulls the guardrails git hooks (commit-msg-convention, pre-commit-content, reference-verify) from melodic-software/claude-code-plugins at runtime. Not eligible for the cheap skip gate — adding an auto-fetched, auto-executed remote config is security-relevant surface.

1 finding (inline comment on lefthook.yml, IMPORTANT): ref: main is a mutable branch pointer rather than a pinned commit SHA, and refetch_frequency: 24h makes lefthook periodically re-fetch it, so the hook scripts that run on every contributor's git commit/git push are whatever is currently on that branch, re-synced roughly daily, with no corresponding commit in this repo to review when they change. The PR's earlier revision vendored these scripts in-repo (each carrying a sha256 tracking header), which gave this repo a reviewable diff on any hook-code change; this revision removes that review surface in favor of trusting the remote's main branch directly. This is a logic/trust-boundary observation this lane is scoped to surface — it's local lefthook.yml config, not a GitHub Actions workflow, so it isn't zizmor's unpinned-action-pin lane. The PR body does link the design discussion (claude-code-plugins#9426), so this may be a knowingly accepted trade-off; flagging it so that acceptance is explicit. Suggested mitigation: pin ref to a specific commit SHA or signed tag and bump it deliberately.

Verified by an independent adversarial pass before posting (confirmed lefthook's remotes:/refetch_frequency semantics and that the carve-out for Actions-pin findings doesn't apply here).

No Actions-workflow files, secrets handling, injection surfaces, or access-control code were touched by this PR, so no findings beyond the one above.

critical-findings: 0

claude-lane-summary: lane=claude-security-review sha=c5fd691999f07494e3bcfce48315ece7a9a15f17 run=40060694646

[claude]

Claude finished @kyle-sexton's task in 1m 43s —— View job

---

Code review — PR #870

• Gather context (diff, PR body, .claude/rules/, REVIEW.md, prior review threads)
• Apply code-review-lane criteria
• Report findings

Scope. The diff is a single 6-line addition, lefthook.yml, adding a remotes: entry that points at plugins/guardrails/git-hooks/lefthook-remote.yml in melodic-software/claude-code-plugins (ref: main, refetch_frequency: 24h). Per the PR description, the earlier revision's vendored .githooks/guardrails/ scripts and local jobs were removed in favor of this remote config.

Findings: none. The change is declarative CI/dev-tooling config with no logic to break:

• remotes:/configs: keys match lefthook's documented remote-config schema.
• The pinned-branch + 24h refetch design is the PR's own stated intent (shared hooks, bounded staleness), not an oversight.
• The earlier Codex finding on .githooks/guardrails/reference-verify.sh (jq argument-size limit) no longer applies to this revision's diff — that file is removed here and is tracked upstream in claude-code-plugins#9426 per the author's reply on that thread.
• Trust/execution implications of pulling hook code from a remote repo are a security-lane concern; pr-review-security.yml runs on this repo, so that's out of scope here per REVIEW.md.

Other checks.

• manifest: N/A — no .claude-plugin/plugin.json or marketplace.json changed.
• Paved paths: no resolvable standards index found locally; nothing to report.
• Closing issue: no PR-context file was supplied to this lane, so closing-issue criteria are unread, not verified met.
• PR body contract (.claude/rules/pr-body-contract.md): body opens with No related issue: <reason> and includes ## Summary, ## Fix, ## Verification, ## Related — compliant.

No holds (cost, trust-gate, critical-security) apply.

claude-lane-summary: lane=claude-review sha=c5fd691999f07494e3bcfce48315ece7a9a15f17 run=40060694646

[github-actions]

claude-review has reviewed this pull request through c5fd691; a later push is reviewed from there.

[github-actions]

claude-security-review has reviewed this pull request through c5fd691; a later push is reviewed from there.