Add 'Use of AI tools' section to CONTRIBUTING.md#21314
Merged
Veykril merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom Dec 21, 2025
Merged
Add 'Use of AI tools' section to CONTRIBUTING.md#21314Veykril merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Veykril merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
|
||
| AI tool use is not discouraged on the rust-analyzer codebase, as long as it meets our quality standards. | ||
| We kindly ask you to disclose usage of AI tools in your contributions. | ||
| If you used them without disclosing it, we may reject your contribution on that basis alone due to the assumption that you likely not reviewed your own submission (so why should we?). |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| If you used them without disclosing it, we may reject your contribution on that basis alone due to the assumption that you likely not reviewed your own submission (so why should we?). | |
| If you used them without disclosing it, we may reject your contribution on that basis alone due to the assumption that you likely have not reviewed your own submission (so why should we?). |
Wilfred
added a commit
to Wilfred/rust-analyzer
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 2, 2026
rust-analyzer allows AI usage (see rust-lang#21314), but requires contributors to declare usage. This adds a rule file that improves LLM output quality and instructs the LLM to declare usage in commit messages. I've written the rules in CLAUDE.md, but also symlinked it to AGENTS.md so other LLM tools pick it up. ## Rules file contents (1) Instructions for both humans and AIs to declare AI usage. (2) Relevant commands for testing, linting and codegen. Note that I deliberately didn't include an overview of the project structure on a folder-by-folder basis. This can go stale, and there's some evidence that project structure can hurt LLM output quality overall. See the following paper: > Evaluating AGENTS.md: > Are Repository-Level Context Files Helpful for Coding Agents? > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.11988 ## Testing I exercised this change with the following contrived prompt. Note that in practice rust-analyzer is hitting review scaling limits for new code actions, but it was easy to test end-to-end. > Add a new code action that replaces the content of a string literal > with the text "banana". ... > commit it This produced a functional code action with both Codex and Claude, and in both cases the commit message mentioned that it was AI generated. Example commit message: Add "Replace string with banana" code action Add a new assist that replaces a string literal's content with "banana" when the cursor is on a STRING token. AI: Generated with Claude Code (claude-opus-4-6). ## AI Usage Disclosures I wrote the first draft of the rules file with Opus 4.6, manually reviewed everything.
Wilfred
added a commit
to Wilfred/rust-analyzer
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 2, 2026
rust-analyzer allows AI usage (see rust-lang#21314), but requires contributors to declare usage. This adds a rule file that improves LLM output quality and instructs the LLM to declare usage in commit messages. I've written the rules in CLAUDE.md, but also symlinked it to AGENTS.md so other LLM tools pick it up. ## Rules file contents (1) Instructions for both humans and AIs to declare AI usage. (2) Relevant commands for testing, linting and codegen. Note that I deliberately didn't include an overview of the project structure on a folder-by-folder basis. This can go stale, and there's some evidence that project structure can hurt LLM output quality overall. See the following paper: > Evaluating AGENTS.md: > Are Repository-Level Context Files Helpful for Coding Agents? > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.11988 ## Testing I exercised this change with the following contrived prompt. Note that in practice rust-analyzer is hitting review scaling limits for new code actions, but it was easy to test end-to-end. > Add a new code action that replaces the content of a string literal > with the text "banana". ... > commit it This produced a functional code action with both Codex and Claude, and in both cases the commit message mentioned that it was AI generated. Example commit message: Add "Replace string with banana" code action Add a new assist that replaces a string literal's content with "banana" when the cursor is on a STRING token. AI: Generated with Claude Code (claude-opus-4-6). I confirmed that the code action worked by testing a rust-analyzer build in Emacs, and also confirmed that the generated tests looked sensible. ## AI Usage Disclosures I wrote the first draft of the rules file with Opus 4.6, manually reviewed everything.
Wilfred
added a commit
to Wilfred/rust-analyzer
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 3, 2026
rust-analyzer allows AI usage (see rust-lang#21314), but requires contributors to declare usage. This adds a rule file that improves LLM output quality and instructs the LLM to declare usage in commit messages. I've written the rules in CLAUDE.md, but also symlinked it to AGENTS.md so other LLM tools pick it up. ## Rules file contents (1) Instructions for both humans and AIs to declare AI usage. (2) Relevant commands for testing, linting and codegen. Note that I deliberately didn't include an overview of the project structure on a folder-by-folder basis. This can go stale, and there's some evidence that project structure can hurt LLM output quality overall. See the following paper: > Evaluating AGENTS.md: > Are Repository-Level Context Files Helpful for Coding Agents? > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.11988 ## Testing I exercised this change with the following contrived prompt. Note that in practice rust-analyzer is hitting review scaling limits for new code actions, but it was easy to test end-to-end. > Add a new code action that replaces the content of a string literal > with the text "banana". ... > commit it This produced a functional code action with both Codex and Claude, and in both cases the commit message mentioned that it was AI generated. Example commit message: Add "Replace string with banana" code action Add a new assist that replaces a string literal's content with "banana" when the cursor is on a STRING token. AI: Generated with Claude Code (claude-opus-4-6). I confirmed that the code action worked by testing a rust-analyzer build in Emacs, and also confirmed that the generated tests looked sensible. ## AI Usage Disclosures I wrote the first draft of the rules file with Opus 4.6, manually reviewed everything.
Member
|
@McSinyx moving this here so we don't spam almost 700 people. As far as I know, the LLM-generated contributions to r-a have been mostly limited, and I'm not personally worried about license laundering in those specific cases, or in general (since people seem to have taken to calling clean-room reverse engineering license laundering). If you have specific concerts about copyrighted code being used in rust-analyzer, please feel free to point to them. The Rust project might take a stance on them in the near future, and if they get banned, we will follow suit. In the meanwhile, we're not going to reject good contributions. As for Guix, I have no stake in it so I'm not going to tell you what to do, but to put it into perspective, projects like Firefox and the Linux kernel probably contain more LLM-generated code than rust-analyzer itself. |
I'm so sorry, @lnicola, I did not know that there are 700 people watching the other PR.
Indeed, I was just gathering information, as it's very unsure if there's anything actionable. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.