Policy guides¶

Two rules are off by default because they encode a decision only your project can make: whether contributors must certify the origin of their work, and whether AI assistance is welcome, disclosed, or refused.

Commit Check does not take a side on either. It gives you a way to enforce the position you have already taken, so it stops being relitigated in every review.

Require signoff (DCO)¶

Projects that use the Developer Certificate of Origin require every commit to carry a Signed-off-by trailer. The Linux kernel and much of the CNCF work this way.

A DCO bot rejecting a pull request after the fact is a poor experience: the contributor has to rewrite history for every commit in the branch. A local check catches a missing sign-off at commit time, before there is anything to rewrite.

Turn it on¶

cchk.toml

[commit]
require_signed_off_by = true

This enables CC012, which is off by default.

Signing off¶

$ git commit --signoff -m "fix: handle an empty config file"

The trailer is appended automatically from your user.name and user.email:

fix: handle an empty config file

Signed-off-by: Your Name <you@example.com>

Forgot it? Fix the last commit in place:

$ git commit --amend --signoff --no-edit

Fix a whole branch:

$ git rebase --signoff main

Make it automatic

Signing off is easy to forget. Combine this rule with the pre-commit hook so a missing trailer is caught at commit time, not at review time.

Identity matters¶

The DCO is a statement about who wrote the code, so it only means something if the identity is real. CC101 and CC102 check the committer name and email, and are enabled by default when their check runs:

$ commit-check --author-name --author-email

To require a company address:

cchk.toml

[commit]
author_email_pattern = "^.+@example\\.com$"

Bots¶

Automation cannot meaningfully sign the DCO, and forcing it to produces meaningless trailers. Exempt bots instead:

cchk.toml

[commit]
require_signed_off_by = true
ignore_authors = ["dependabot[bot]", "renovate[bot]"]

ignore_authors matches the commit author and any Co-authored-by: trailers.

AI attribution¶

AI coding tools stamp their own trailers on the commits they help with. Whether that is welcome, required or unacceptable is a decision each project makes for itself, and the industry has landed in three places — which are the three values ai_attribution takes:

`ai_attribution`	The project's position	Rules
`"ignore"` (default)	no stated position	—
`"forbid"`	no AI attribution in the history	CC013
`"disclose"`	AI is welcome, said out loud, and not credited as a person	CC014–CC016

Whichever you pick, the check reads what the message says. It cannot see assistance that left no trace — see the note below.

The default: no opinion¶

[commit]
ai_attribution = "ignore"   # the default

CC013 is off. Commits carrying AI trailers pass, and so do commits without them.

Forbidding AI-attributed commits¶

cchk.toml

[commit]
ai_attribution = "forbid"

Commits carrying a recognised AI signature now fail:

CC013 ai-attribution check failed ==> Claude Code
AI attribution is forbidden in this project — detected: Claude Code
Suggest: This project does not accept AI attribution in commit messages. Remove the AI trailer lines and re-commit.
Docs: https://commit-check.com/rules/#cc013

Recognised signatures are co-author and sign-off lines naming Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Gemini, Cursor, Devin, Aider, Windsurf and Tabby, the disclosure trailers Assisted-by: and Generated-by:, vendor marks such as 🤖 Generated with Claude Code, and generic AI model names. This is the position Kubernetes takes — no AI trailers in the history, disclosure in the pull request instead.

This checks disclosure, not authorship

These rules read commit metadata. They detect a commit that says it was AI-assisted; they cannot detect one that was AI-assisted and did not say so.

Set against a policy of "no AI contributions", it is an honesty check on contributors who are already following the rules — not an enforcement mechanism against those who aren't. Be clear with yourself about which of those you are buying.

Asking for disclosure instead¶

Most projects that allow AI assistance ask to be told about it. The Linux kernel, Fedora and FluxCD want an Assisted-by: trailer; the Apache Software Foundation recommends Generated-by:. The kernel also says an AI agent must never add a Signed-off-by: line, because only a person can certify the DCO.

cchk.toml

[commit]
ai_attribution = "disclose"

That turns on three rules, each about one of those conditions:

Rule	Asks that
CC014	the assistance is disclosed with an accepted trailer
CC015	the tool is not credited as a co-author
CC016	the tool did not sign off the commit

A commit that a vendor stamped and nobody disclosed fails the first two, and the failure carries the disclosure already written:

CC014 ai-disclosure check failed ==> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
AI assistance is not disclosed with Assisted-by or Generated-by — detected: Claude Code
Suggest: Disclose the tool with "Assisted-by: Claude Opus 5"
Docs: https://commit-check.com/rules/#cc014

CC015 ai-co-author check failed ==> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
An AI tool is credited as a co-author: Claude Code
Suggest: Use "Assisted-by: Claude Opus 5" in place of the co-author line
Docs: https://commit-check.com/rules/#cc015

Both carry the same correction in --format json: the co-author line rewritten as the project's disclosure trailer, keeping the name the tool gave itself.

"fix": "feat: add caching layer\n\nAssisted-by: Claude Opus 5"

Once the tool is disclosed, CC015 asks only for the co-author line to go, and a commit written the way the kernel asks passes all three:

printf 'feat: add caching layer\n\nAssisted-by: LLM coccinelle sparse\nSigned-off-by: Jane Dev <jane@example.com>' | commit-check -m

Choosing the format¶

ai_disclosure_trailers is the list of trailers that count as a disclosure, and the first one is what a correction is written with:

cchk.toml

[commit]
ai_attribution = "disclose"
ai_disclosure_trailers = ["Assisted-by"]   # the kernel's, and nothing else

Listing Co-authored-by says the project accepts the tool as a co-author — pytest and IREE do — and CC015 then passes. Signed-off-by is refused whatever else you list, so CC016 cannot be configured away.

ai_disclosure_pattern asks for a particular shape, such as FluxCD's agent/model:

cchk.toml

[commit]
ai_attribution = "disclose"
ai_disclosure_pattern = '^\S+/\S+$'

CC014 ai-disclosure check failed ==> Assisted-by: Claude Code
The Assisted-by value does not match the required pattern: ^\S+/\S+$
Suggest: Write the Assisted-by value so that it matches ^\S+/\S+$ (set by ai_disclosure_pattern in the [commit] config)

That failure carries no correction, because the tool should not guess which model or format you meant.

Disclosure that is appreciated, not required¶

Some projects — CPython among them — welcome disclosure without demanding it, while still refusing the tool as a co-author. Put CC014 in the top-level warn list and the other two keep enforcing:

cchk.toml

warn = ["ai_disclosure"]

[commit]
ai_attribution = "disclose"

CC014 ai-disclosure check warning ==> 🤖 Generated with [Claude
AI assistance is not disclosed with Assisted-by or Generated-by — detected: Claude Code
Suggest: Disclose the tool with "Assisted-by: Claude Code"
Docs: https://commit-check.com/rules/#cc014
This rule is set to warn in the config; it does not fail the run.

The run still passes. See Report a rule without enforcing it.

Exempting automation¶

Bots that legitimately carry AI trailers can be excluded:

cchk.toml

[commit]
ai_attribution = "forbid"
ignore_authors = ["dependabot[bot]", "renovate[bot]"]

Documenting the decision¶

Whichever way you go, the config file is not where contributors look. State the policy where they will see it — CONTRIBUTING.md, the pull request template — and let Commit Check be the mechanism rather than the announcement.

Enforcing an undocumented policy produces a confusing failure for somebody acting in good faith.