Skip to content

docs: clarify dependencies section is for tool dependencies only#2045

Merged
aknysh merged 2 commits intomainfrom
osterman/deps-docs-fix
Feb 2, 2026
Merged

docs: clarify dependencies section is for tool dependencies only#2045
aknysh merged 2 commits intomainfrom
osterman/deps-docs-fix

Conversation

@osterman
Copy link
Member

@osterman osterman commented Jan 30, 2026

what

  • Removed misleading component dependency examples that showed unsupported syntax
  • Clarified that the dependencies section currently supports tool version requirements only
  • Added admonition directing users to settings.depends_on for component execution order
  • Updated frontmatter, intro, and use cases to reflect tool-only focus
  • Added reference link to settings.depends_on documentation

why

The documentation previously conflated two separate concepts: tool dependencies (currently implemented via /dependencies/tools) and component dependencies (only available via settings.depends_on). The examples showing component dependency syntax were misleading since they're not yet supported in the /dependencies section. This change prevents user confusion and guides them to the correct feature.

references

This fixes documentation confusion around component dependencies vs tool dependencies. The plan is to consolidate these features in a future release, so this admonition acknowledges that intent.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Clarified dependencies documentation to emphasize tool version requirements as the primary focus
    • Expanded tool dependency configuration guidance, including configuration scopes, version formats, and inheritance behavior
    • Added information directing users to settings for managing component execution order
    • Updated related documentation references to include component dependencies guidance

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

The dependencies section currently only supports tool version requirements.
Component dependencies should use settings.depends_on instead. Added an
admonition directing users to the correct documentation and noting that
consolidation is planned.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@osterman osterman requested a review from a team as a code owner January 30, 2026 21:35
@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/s Small size PR label Jan 30, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Dependency Review

✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues found.

Scanned Files

None

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 30, 2026

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The dependencies documentation page is refocused to emphasize tool dependencies only. Component dependency content is removed and replaced with a tip directing users to settings.depends_on. The Tool Dependencies section is expanded with configuration scope documentation, version formats, and merge behavior examples.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Documentation Updates
website/docs/stacks/dependencies.mdx
Removed component dependencies discussion; refocused page on tool dependencies. Updated introduction, use cases, and best practices. Expanded Tool Dependencies section with configuration scopes (Global, Component-Type, Component Level) and inheritance behavior. Added tip block directing users to settings.depends_on for component execution order. Updated Related Documentation links.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~4 minutes

Suggested labels

no-release

Suggested reviewers

  • aknysh
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately reflects the main change: clarifying that the dependencies documentation section covers only tool dependencies, which aligns with the PR's core objective of removing component dependency content and adding clarification.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch osterman/deps-docs-fix

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

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

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 75.63%. Comparing base (4d6767d) to head (c404f3c).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2045   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   75.63%   75.63%           
=======================================
  Files         793      793           
  Lines       73888    73888           
=======================================
  Hits        55883    55883           
+ Misses      14517    14516    -1     
- Partials     3488     3489    +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 75.63% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
see 5 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@osterman osterman added the no-release Do not create a new release (wait for additional code changes) label Jan 31, 2026
@aknysh aknysh merged commit 4300c5c into main Feb 2, 2026
57 checks passed
@aknysh aknysh deleted the osterman/deps-docs-fix branch February 2, 2026 18:24
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

These changes were released in v1.205.1-rc.2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

no-release Do not create a new release (wait for additional code changes) size/s Small size PR

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants