Skip to Content
FeaturesRepository Configuration

Repository Configuration (.codestax.yml)

A .codestax.yml file at the repository root lets a team add to its review policy from the codebase itself, versioned with the code. It can only add: extra path exclusions and focus notes for the AI reviewer. It can never remove an organisation exclusion, suppress or downgrade a finding, or change a quality gate. Those stay in the dashboard, where only organisation administrators can change them.

Example

version: 1 exclude_paths: - "vendor/**" - "generated/" - "fixtures/**" review: focus: - "Anything that reaches a shell, a subprocess or a git command from request data." - "Every query that touches customer data must filter by organisation."
KeyTypeLimitsEffect
exclude_pathslist of glob patterns50 patterns, 255 characters eachAdded to the organisation and repository exclusions for scans and pull-request reviews
review.focuslist of sentences10 notes, 300 characters eachGiven to the AI reviewer as areas that deserve extra scrutiny
versionnumberoptionalReserved; 1 today

Patterns follow the same matching as dashboard exclusions: dir/ means everything under the directory, ** spans directories. Patterns that start with / or -, or contain .., are ignored and counted as invalid.

Which version of the file applies

  • Pull-request reviews read the file from the target branch at the commit the review is based on, never from the branch under review. A pull request therefore cannot loosen the policy that reviews it. When a pull request changes .codestax.yml, the review says so and applies the new configuration only to reviews after it merges.
  • Full scans read the file from the commit being scanned.

What the review shows

The Analyzer coverage section of the pull-request comment names the file and its effect, for example:

Repository config (.codestax.yml on main): 2 extra path exclusions, 1 focus note

Entries the parser could not accept are counted there as ignored, so a typo never silently disappears.

Security contract

Focus notes are treated as untrusted data by the reviewer, exactly like custom rules: they can point the analysis at an area, they cannot instruct it, expand its scope, select a severity or alter its output. Findings are still verified against the changed lines by the worker.