Add CodeRabbit configuration for AI-assisted code reviews

[MatthewKhouzam]

What it does

Add AI review to trace compass. This is not replacing human reviews. File taken from here: https://github.com/coderabbitai/awesome-coderabbit/tree/main/configs/java

How to test

Check out CI

Follow-ups

Review checklist

• As an author, I have thoroughly tested my changes and carefully followed the instructions in this template

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated configuration settings for development tooling and automation processes.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new top-level .coderabbit.yaml configuration file is added, defining settings for code reviews, environment configuration, path-based filtering, instruction blocks for Java sources, autopilot review behaviour, tool integrations, chat automation, and knowledge-base preferences. No code or public API declarations are modified.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Configuration file addition \.coderabbit.yaml``	New configuration file defining review settings, path filtering, Java source instructions, autopilot review options, tool configurations, chat automation, and knowledge-base preferences.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~15 minutes

• Verify all configuration keys and values align with expected CodeRabbit YAML schema
• Review path-based instruction blocks for Java sources to ensure they are correctly specified
• Confirm tool integration and autopilot review settings (abort_on_close, auto_review, base_branches) are appropriate for the project's intended workflow

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely summarizes the main change: adding a CodeRabbit configuration file for AI-assisted code reviews, which directly matches the changeset.
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

.coderabbit.yaml (1)

19-24: Simplify redundant path filter.

Line 20 ('**/*') already includes all files, making line 21 ('**/gen/**') redundant. Either remove the intermediate include pattern or restructure filters to use explicit includes only.

  path_filters:
-   - '**/*'
-   - '**/gen/**'
-   - '!**/test/**/gen/**'
+   - '**/gen/**'
+   - '!**/test/**/gen/**'

Alternatively, if explicit documentation of included paths is valuable, clarify via comments.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between eb48c52 and 204c159.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .coderabbit.yaml (1 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (3)

• GitHub Check: build / build
• GitHub Check: build / build
• GitHub Check: build / build

🔇 Additional comments (6)

.coderabbit.yaml (6)

31-31: Clarify the var keyword and null cast instruction.

Line 31 states "Allow use of var keyword when value is a cast null", but the phrasing is ambiguous. The var keyword cannot directly infer type from null alone. Clarify whether the intent is to allow var x = (String) null; (explicit cast) or a different scenario.

        - Allow use of `var` keyword when value is a cast `null`.
+       - Allow use of `var` keyword with explicit casts to null, e.g., `var x = (ClassName) null;`.

---

35-48: Verify feasibility of the public API analysis requirement.

Lines 38–48 require CodeRabbit to deeply analyse code flow through private methods and external library calls to identify up to 25 public API changes per PR. This is a substantial analysis scope. Confirm that:

1. CodeRabbit can reliably perform transitive call flow analysis through private implementation details
2. The 25-item threshold balances comprehensiveness with review readability
3. This level of detail aligns with the stated objective of augmenting (not replacing) human review

Consider reducing scope if the requirement generates excessive or low-signal documentation.

---

65-128: Tool configuration aligns well with a Java-based project.

The selected tools are appropriate: Java-focused analysis (PMD, ast-grep, Semgrep), documentation linting (Markdownlint), and language quality checks (LanguageTool, ESLint, Biome). Disabled tools target languages and platforms not relevant to Eclipse Trace Compass. LanguageTool customisation (disabling TYPOS, TYPOGRAPHY, CASING) is sensible to reduce noise.

---

57-64: Auto-review configuration is appropriately configured for the project.

Incremental review on each push to the main branch, with drafts disabled, supports a structured review workflow. Exclusion of draft PRs encourages authors to mark reviews as ready-to-review, reducing noise on early-stage work.

---

129-142: Chat and knowledge-base settings enable AI-augmented collaboration.

Configuration enables auto-reply and leverages organisation learnings/issues with sensible scope ('auto'). Jira/Linear integrations remain unconfigured, appropriate if not in use. These settings align with the stated goal of adding AI review features while respecting human review authority.

---

1-1: The schema URL is correct and current—no action needed.

The schema reference https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json is the official, documented schema URL used in CodeRabbit's YAML configuration examples and is up-to-date. Version 2 is the current schema version.

[bhufmann]

Looks good to me. Thanks!