G

gateguard

by @affaan-mv
4.3(120)

GateGuard 是一个事实强制预操作门,它阻止 AI 代理在编辑、写入或执行 Bash 命令前进行猜测。它强制代理在执行操作前调查相关事实(如导入文件、数据模式、用户指令),从而显著提高输出质量。通过三阶段门控(拒绝、强制调查、允许重试),确保 AI 代理基于事实而非假设进行操作。

ai-agentcode-qualitysecuritydevopsautomationGitHub
安装方式
git clone https://github.com/affaan-m/everything-claude-code.git
compare_arrows

Before / After 效果对比

1
使用前

未受 GateGuard 保护的 AI 代理在执行代码修改或创建新文件时,往往依赖猜测或不充分的自我评估,导致设计深度不足、与现有代码库不兼容或引入难以发现的错误,平均质量得分仅为 6.75/10。

使用后

引入 GateGuard 后,AI 代理被强制在执行操作前进行事实调查,例如列出导入文件、检查数据模式或确认用户指令。这种强制性的调查提高了代理的上下文感知能力和决策质量,使平均输出质量得分提升至 9.0/10。

SKILL.md

GateGuard — Fact-Forcing Pre-Action Gate

A PreToolUse hook that forces Claude to investigate before editing. Instead of self-evaluation ("are you sure?"), it demands concrete facts. The act of investigation creates awareness that self-evaluation never did.

When to Activate

  • Working on any codebase where file edits affect multiple modules
  • Projects with data files that have specific schemas or date formats
  • Teams where AI-generated code must match existing patterns
  • Any workflow where Claude tends to guess instead of investigating

Core Concept

LLM self-evaluation doesn't work. Ask "did you violate any policies?" and the answer is always "no." This is verified experimentally.

But asking "list every file that imports this module" forces the LLM to run Grep and Read. The investigation itself creates context that changes the output.

Three-stage gate:

1. DENY  — block the first Edit/Write/Bash attempt
2. FORCE — tell the model exactly which facts to gather
3. ALLOW — permit retry after facts are presented

No competitor does all three. Most stop at deny.

Evidence

Two independent A/B tests, identical agents, same task:

TaskGatedUngatedGap
Analytics module8.0/106.5/10+1.5
Webhook validator10.0/107.0/10+3.0
Average9.06.75+2.25

Both agents produce code that runs and passes tests. The difference is design depth.

Gate Types

Edit / MultiEdit Gate (first edit per file)

MultiEdit is handled identically — each file in the batch is gated individually.

Before editing {file_path}, present these facts:

1. List ALL files that import/require this file (use Grep)
2. List the public functions/classes affected by this change
3. If this file reads/writes data files, show field names, structure,
   and date format (use redacted or synthetic values, not raw production data)
4. Quote the user's current instruction verbatim

Write Gate (first new file creation)

Before creating {file_path}, present these facts:

1. Name the file(s) and line(s) that will call this new file
2. Confirm no existing file serves the same purpose (use Glob)
3. If this file reads/writes data files, show field names, structure,
   and date format (use redacted or synthetic values, not raw production data)
4. Quote the user's current instruction verbatim

Destructive Bash Gate (every destructive command)

Triggers on: rm -rf, git reset --hard, git push --force, drop table, etc.

1. List all files/data this command will modify or delete
2. Write a one-line rollback procedure
3. Quote the user's current instruction verbatim

Routine Bash Gate (once per session)

1. The current user request in one sentence
2. What this specific command verifies or produces

Quick Start

Option A: Use the ECC hook (zero install)

The hook at scripts/hooks/gateguard-fact-force.js is included in this plugin. Enable it via hooks.json.

If GateGuard blocks setup or repair work, start the session with ECC_GATEGUARD=off. For hook-level control, keep using ECC_DISABLED_HOOKS with the GateGuard hook ID.

Option B: Full package with config

pip install gateguard-ai
gateguard init

This adds .gateguard.yml for per-project configuration (custom messages, ignore paths, gate toggles).

Anti-Patterns

  • Don't use self-evaluation instead. "Are you sure?" always gets "yes." This is experimentally verified.
  • Don't skip the data schema check. Both A/B test agents assumed ISO-8601 dates when real data used %Y/%m/%d %H:%M. Checking data structure (with redacted values) prevents this entire class of bugs.
  • Don't gate every single Bash command. Routine bash gates once per session. Destructive bash gates every time. This balance avoids slowdown while catching real risks.

Best Practices

  • Let the gate fire naturally. Don't try to pre-answer the gate questions — the investigation itself is what improves quality.
  • Customize gate messages for your domain. If your project has specific conventions, add them to the gate prompts.
  • Use .gateguard.yml to ignore paths like .venv/, node_modules/, .git/.

Related Skills

  • safety-guard — Runtime safety checks (complementary, not overlapping)
  • code-reviewer — Post-edit review (GateGuard is pre-edit investigation)

用户评价 (0)

发表评价

效果
易用性
文档
兼容性

暂无评价

统计数据

安装量2.2K
评分4.3 / 5.0
版本
更新日期2026年5月23日
对比案例1 组

用户评分

4.3(120)
5
37%
4
43%
3
13%
2
5%
1
2%

为此 Skill 评分

0.0

兼容平台

🤖claude-code

时间线

创建2026年5月8日
最后更新2026年5月23日