brooks-lint featured as #1 on Gemini CLI Spotlight Extensions ⭐130
I'm thrilled to share that brooks-lint has just been featured in Gemini CLI's Spotlight Extensions — the curated showcase for the best community-built extensions. It's already sitting at ⭐ 130 stars and I'd love for more developers to try it, contribute, and help shape where it goes next.
The Problem: AI Reviews Without Roots
Most AI-powered code review tools give you suggestions that feel disconnected — vague, hard to verify, and easy to dismiss. "This function is too long." OK, but why? According to whom? What's the right way to fix it?
brooks-lint was built to answer that. Every diagnostic is grounded in 12 classic software engineering books, complete with citations, so you know exactly which principle you're violating and where to learn more.
The Twelve Books
brooks-lint synthesizes wisdom from:
- The Mythical Man-Month — Frederick Brooks
- Code Complete — Steve McConnell
- Refactoring — Martin Fowler
- Clean Architecture — Robert C. Martin
- The Pragmatic Programmer — Hunt & Thomas
- Domain-Driven Design — Eric Evans
- A Philosophy of Software Design — John Ousterhout
- Software Engineering at Google — Winters et al.
- Working Effectively with Legacy Code — Michael Feathers
- Growing Object-Oriented Software, Guided by Tests — Freeman & Pryce
- Accelerate — Nicole Forsgren et al.
- xUnit Test Patterns — Gerard Meszaros
The Six Decay Risks
Instead of just flagging style issues, brooks-lint diagnoses your code across 6 production-code decay dimensions:
| Decay Risk | Diagnostic Question |
|---|---|
| 🧠 Cognitive Overload | How much mental effort to understand this? |
| 🔗 Change Propagation | How many unrelated things break on one change? |
| 📋 Knowledge Duplication | Is the same decision expressed in multiple places? |
| 🌀 Accidental Complexity | Is the code more complex than the problem? |
| 📦 Dependency Disorder | |
| Do dependencies flow in a consistent direction? | |
| 🗺️ Domain Model Distortion | Does the code faithfully represent the domain? |
Each finding includes: a severity label, the diagnostic question, the book source, and a concrete remedy.
6 Analysis Modes
PR Review — Full review before you merge, with book citations
Architecture Audit — Structural health check of your codebase
Tech Debt — Identifies and quantifies accumulated debt
Test Quality — Evaluates your test suite quality
Health Dashboard — High-level health score (e.g., 28/100) for your project
Full-Sweep Auto-Fix — Scans everything and applies fixes automatically
Install in One Line
If you have Gemini CLI installed:
gemini extensions install https://github.com/hyhmrright/brooks-lint
It also works with Claude (.claude-plugin) and Codex (.codex-plugin) — the repo contains all three.
Want to Contribute?
The project is actively evolving and I'd love help from the community. Here's what's on the roadmap:
- More book sources (suggestions welcome!)
- Language-specific decay heuristics
- IDE integration
- Better eval coverage
- CI/CD pipeline integration
👉 GitHub: https://github.com/hyhmrright/brooks-lint
👉 Gemini CLI Spotlight: https://geminicli.com/extensions/?name=hyhmrrightbrooks-lint
Open issues, submit PRs, or just drop a ⭐ if you find it useful. Every bit of feedback helps shape the next version. Let's build better code reviews together! 🚀
Top comments (3)
OK, this is pretty awesome. I'm going to have to try this out. Glad you posted this!
Thank you.
The citations aspect is what really sets this apart - actually pointing to the source material instead of just saying "this is bad" makes it way more actionable.