CQA 2.1: VS Code Feb 2026#315
Conversation
Signed-off-by: A.Arnold <anarnold@redhat.com>
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis pull request updates documentation files to standardize naming conventions and remove a public attribute declaration. Changes include replacing abbreviated "VS Code" references with "Visual Studio Code" throughout the VS Code documentation, fixing a typo ("clicing" → "clicking"), and removing the Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (3)
docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adoc (2)
20-24:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorInconsistent UI element name: "
{ProductShortName} View Analysis" should be "{ProductShortName} Analysis View".Both lines 20 and 24 use the word order "View Analysis", while every other reference in this PR — including the Command Palette entry on line 22 of this same file (
{ProductShortName}:Open Analysis View) and the bold UI reference inproc_vscode-analyzing-application.adoc("{ProductShortName} Analysis View page") — uses "Analysis View". Users following these steps will not find a pane named "View Analysis".📝 Proposed fix
-. Open the `{ProductShortName} View Analysis` page by clicking the book icon on the `{ProductShortName}: Issues` pane of the {ProductShortName} extension. +. Open the `{ProductShortName} Analysis View` page by clicking the book icon on the `{ProductShortName}: Issues` pane of the {ProductShortName} extension.-. Click the settings button on the `{ProductShortName} View Analysis` page to configure a profile for your project. The `Get Ready to Analyze` pane has the following basic configurations required for an application analysis: +. Click the settings button on the `{ProductShortName} Analysis View` page to configure a profile for your project. The `Get Ready to Analyze` pane has the following basic configurations required for an application analysis:🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adoc` around lines 20 - 24, Replace the inconsistent UI label "{ProductShortName} View Analysis" with the canonical "{ProductShortName} Analysis View" in this doc so it matches the Command Palette entry "{ProductShortName}:Open Analysis View" and other references; update both occurrences in the snippet (the sentence opening the Analysis View via the book icon and the sentence about clicking the settings button on the Analysis View page) so all UI strings use "Analysis View" consistently.
29-29:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorGrammar: "If you mentioned" should be "If you mention".
The conditional clause uses past tense where present tense is required.
📝 Proposed fix
-If you mentioned a new target or a source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to create and add the new item to the list. +If you mention a new target or source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to create and add the new item to the list.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adoc` at line 29, The conditional clause in the sentence "If you mentioned a new target or a source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to create and add the new item to the list." uses past tense; change "If you mentioned" to present tense "If you mention" so the sentence reads "If you mention a new target or a source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to create and add the new item to the list." to match the rest of the instructional text.docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adoc (1)
9-14:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorBranding change LGTM; verify "Solution server settings" and "Generative AI settings" are covered in the procedure.
The abstract now lists four settings categories, but the
.Proceduresection only documents settings from two of them (Log level,Analyzer path,Debug:Webview). "Solution server settings" and "Generative AI settings" have no corresponding procedure steps, leaving users without actionable guidance for those categories.Either extend the procedure to cover the new categories, or remove them from the abstract listing if they are intentionally deferred.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adoc` around lines 9 - 14, The abstract now lists four categories but the .Procedure only documents "Log level", "Analyzer path", and "Debug:Webview"; update the .Procedure to either add step-by-step guidance for the missing "Solution server settings" and "Generative AI settings" (include specific fields, expected values, examples of use, and links to any related commands or UI locations) or remove those two categories from the abstract; edit the document so the .Procedure section explicitly mentions and walks through the "Solution server settings" and "Generative AI settings" (or drop them from the list) and ensure the existing setting names (Log level, Analyzer path, Debug:Webview, Solution server settings, Generative AI settings) are consistently referenced.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/topics/templates/document-attributes.adoc`:
- Around line 99-100: Remove or replace the unresolved {LinkAPI} attribute
reference in docs/topics/rules-important-links.adoc: open that file, locate the
`{LinkAPI}` occurrence (line ~10) and either delete it or replace it with the
correct URL/text; if the original value should come from
document-attributes.adoc restore or re-add the `:LinkAPI:` attribute there (or
inline the intended link) so the rendered output no longer contains an
unresolved attribute.
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adoc`:
- Around line 9-14: The abstract now lists four categories but the .Procedure
only documents "Log level", "Analyzer path", and "Debug:Webview"; update the
.Procedure to either add step-by-step guidance for the missing "Solution server
settings" and "Generative AI settings" (include specific fields, expected
values, examples of use, and links to any related commands or UI locations) or
remove those two categories from the abstract; edit the document so the
.Procedure section explicitly mentions and walks through the "Solution server
settings" and "Generative AI settings" (or drop them from the list) and ensure
the existing setting names (Log level, Analyzer path, Debug:Webview, Solution
server settings, Generative AI settings) are consistently referenced.
In `@docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adoc`:
- Around line 20-24: Replace the inconsistent UI label "{ProductShortName} View
Analysis" with the canonical "{ProductShortName} Analysis View" in this doc so
it matches the Command Palette entry "{ProductShortName}:Open Analysis View" and
other references; update both occurrences in the snippet (the sentence opening
the Analysis View via the book icon and the sentence about clicking the settings
button on the Analysis View page) so all UI strings use "Analysis View"
consistently.
- Line 29: The conditional clause in the sentence "If you mentioned a new target
or a source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to create and
add the new item to the list." uses past tense; change "If you mentioned" to
present tense "If you mention" so the sentence reads "If you mention a new
target or a source technology in your custom rule, you can type that name to
create and add the new item to the list." to match the rest of the instructional
text.
ℹ️ Review info
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
docs/topics/templates/document-attributes.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_installing-vscode-extension.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_vscode-analyzing-application.adoc
2 participants
PR #315 — Summary
Repository: migtools/mta-documentation
PR: #315
Title: CQA 2.1: VS Code Feb 2026
Author: @anarnold97
Source branch:
CQA-2-1-VS-CODE→ Target:mainStatus: Open
Stats: 5 files changed · +11 additions · −10 deletions · 1 commit
Overview
This PR applies CQA 2.1 (Content Quality Assessment) fixes to the VS Code Extension Guide: it standardizes product naming to Visual Studio Code, fixes a typo, and removes an unapproved GitHub link from shared document attributes.
Changes
1. Document attributes
docs/topics/templates/document-attributes.adoc:LinkAPI:attribute (GitHub URL) was commented out and replaced with a short note. The link is no longer active until explicitly approved per Red Hat policy.2. VS Code procedure and concept topics
docs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_configuring-profile-settings.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_installing-vscode-extension.adocdocs/topics/vscode/proc_vscode-analyzing-application.adocRationale
:LinkAPI:reference aligns with Red Hat’s GitLinks rule until the link is approved.Review notes (CodeRabbit)
proc_configuring-profile-settings.adoc: use "Analysis View" consistently (e.g. "{ProductShortName} Analysis View" instead of "View Analysis"); change "If you mentioned" → "If you mention".proc_configuring-lighstspeed-ide-settings.adoc: either document "Solution server settings" and "Generative AI settings" in the procedure or remove them from the abstract.{LinkAPI}usage (e.g. inrules-important-links.adoc, which already had that reference commented).Checklist
:LinkAPI:attribute commented out in document attributes