default claude and prettier repo level config

[kernelsam]

Issue number: senzing-garage/template-python#340 senzing-factory/build-resources#245

---

Resolves senzing-garage/template-python#340
Resolves senzing-factory/build-resources#245

[kernelsam]

@docktermj any non required failures are okay here, just needs a review

[github-actions]

🤖 Claude Code Review

---

Code Review Results

Code Quality

✅ Code follows style guide

• All files are configuration/metadata files (JSON and Markdown)
• .claude/commands/senzing-code-review.md:1-3 - Simple markdown command definition, follows basic formatting
• .claude/settings.local.json:1-3 - Valid JSON configuration
• .vscode/cspell.json:1-90 - Valid JSON configuration with alphabetically sorted words

✅ No commented-out code

• The diff removes JSON comments from .vscode/cspell.json (lines starting with //), which is actually an improvement
• Comments removed: "Version of the setting file. Always 0.2", "language - current active spelling language", "words - list of words to be always considered correct"

✅ Meaningful variable names

• Configuration keys are clear: includeCoAuthoredBy, version, language, words, ignorePaths

✅ DRY principle followed

• No code duplication detected in the changes

✅ No defects identified

• .vscode/cspell.json:4-77 - Word list has been alphabetically sorted (improvement from unsorted)
• Added new word "esbenp" at line 33
• All JSON files are syntactically valid

⚠️ Project memory configuration check

• No .claude/CLAUDE.md file found in the repository
• .claude/settings.local.json:1-3 - This file has .local.json extension, suggesting it's for local development, which is appropriate

Testing

❌ Unit tests for new functions

• N/A - No functional code added, only configuration files

❌ Integration tests for new endpoints

• N/A - No endpoints added

❌ Edge cases covered

• N/A - No code logic to test

❌ Test coverage > 80%

• N/A - No code to test

Documentation

⚠️ README updated if needed

• No README updates included
• The changes add Claude Code configuration that might warrant documentation, but these are standard configuration files that may not require README updates

❌ API docs updated

• N/A - No API changes

✅ Inline comments for complex logic

• N/A - Configuration files don't require inline comments
• Note: JSON comments were actually removed from .vscode/cspell.json, which is correct since JSON standard doesn't support comments (though some parsers allow them)

⚠️ CHANGELOG.md updated

• Not updated for this change
• These are primarily development tool configurations, which may not warrant CHANGELOG entries depending on project conventions

✅ Markdown files follow CommonMark specification

• .claude/commands/senzing-code-review.md:1-3 - Valid CommonMark format with proper heading and list syntax
• No extra whitespace detected

Security

✅ No hardcoded credentials

• No credentials found in any of the changed files

✅ Input validation implemented

• N/A - Configuration files only

✅ Proper error handling

• N/A - No code logic

✅ No sensitive data in logs

• N/A - No logging code

✅ No license files (.lic) or AQAAAD strings

• No .lic files added
• The AQAAAD string appears in untracked files (prompt-temp.md, prompt-header.md) but not in the PR diff being reviewed

---

Summary

Overall Assessment: ✅ APPROVED with minor notes

This PR adds Claude Code and VSCode configuration files with the following characteristics:

Strengths:

• Improves .vscode/cspell.json by removing non-standard JSON comments and alphabetically sorting the word list
• Adds proper Claude Code configuration for automated code reviews
• All files are syntactically valid
• No security concerns

Notes:

• The changes are entirely configuration/tooling related with no functional code
• .claude/settings.local.json has .local in the name, suggesting local-only configuration (appropriate)
• No CHANGELOG update, but this may be acceptable for tooling configuration changes depending on project conventions
• Consider documenting the new /senzing-code-review command in project documentation if this is a new team workflow

No blocking issues identified.

Automated code review analyzing defects and coding standards