[tillywoodfield]

What & why

CI's lint job and .pre-commit-config.yaml ran different checks at different versions, so CI never ran codespell, mdformat, actionlint or the hygiene hooks, and a commit never ran sqlfluff. The pre-commit config is now the one definition, and CI runs every hook on every file.

Closes #24

Changes

• ruff and sqlfluff run as local hooks through uv run, like ty, so all three run at their uv.lock versions. The ruff hooks pass --force-exclude, as the remote ones did.
• sqlfluff runs on a commit only when it touches dbt/models/. It reads DUCKDB_PATH from .env locally. In CI, UV_NO_ENV_FILE makes uv ignore the missing .env and the job sets DUCKDB_PATH.
• The lint job runs pre-commit run --all-files --show-diff-on-failure, with the hook environments cached on the config's hash. A hook that rewrites a file fails the job and prints the diff.
• docs/one/conversion_tables/transformations.md is rewrapped so no line starts with 1999), which mdformat would otherwise escape as 1999\). The file is the provenance's dataTransformationDescription, so the escape would have reached the MCF.
• b"caf\xe9\n" in tests/dfo/skills/test_assets.py carries # codespell:ignore caf, so codespell no longer rewrites it to calf.

Notes for reviewers

• Local shellcheck wasn't installed, so actionlint has not yet linted the workflow's run: scripts. On the ubuntu runner it will, so the first CI run is that check.
• pre-commit autoupdate doesn't touch the local hooks. Their versions move with uv lock --upgrade.

Checklist

• Addresses one issue, linked above
• Tests updated where relevant
• Docs updated where relevant
• Self-reviewed the diff

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[tillywoodfield]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-27T14:30:13.987383Z	f854f73	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[tillywoodfield]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e24c91af0b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[tillywoodfield]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please.

Reviewed commit: f854f73620

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".