Recipe catalog / commit-message-fit
Check commit message accuracy
Does message accurately describe change, neither omitting a material part nor claiming work not present?
You need to flag commit or pull request titles that understate, overstate, or misdescribe the change they accompany before merge or changelog generation.
Explore this recipe interactively ยท Source and implementation guide
Use commit-message-fit in TypeScript
Install with npm install jev-recipes. Requires Node.js 22.9 or newer and ES modules. Set TYPESAFE_API_KEY in your server environment for live calls, which send input to TypeSafe and use API quota. See the installation guide.
import { commitMessageFit } from 'jev-recipes/commit-message-fit';
const result = await commitMessageFit({
"message": "Fix off-by-one in pagination cursor and add regression test",
"change": "In paginate() in src/api/list.ts, changed the end index from offset + limit to offset + limit - 1 so the last page no longer repeats the first row of the next page. Added the test 'returns the last page without a duplicate row' to tests/list.test.ts.",
"minConfidence": 0.8
});
console.log(result);
Input contract
| Field | Type | Needed |
|---|---|---|
| message | string | Required |
| change | string | Required |
| minConfidence | number | Optional |
Full input and result schemas
{
"input": {
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"message": {
"type": "string"
},
"change": {
"type": "string"
},
"minConfidence": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 1
}
},
"required": [
"message",
"change"
]
},
"result": {
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"model": {
"type": "string"
},
"usage": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"input_tokens": {
"type": "integer",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 9007199254740991
},
"output_tokens": {
"type": "integer",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 9007199254740991
}
},
"required": [
"input_tokens",
"output_tokens"
],
"additionalProperties": false
},
"status": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"ready",
"review"
]
},
"probability": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 1
},
"confidence": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 1
},
"verdict": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"fits",
"mismatched"
]
}
},
"required": [
"model",
"usage",
"status",
"probability",
"confidence",
"verdict"
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
}Saved example result
This hand-authored response demonstrates the contract. It is not a model accuracy measurement. Run it without an API key: npx jev-recipes demo commit-message-fit.
{
"model": "demo-fixture",
"usage": {
"input_tokens": 0,
"output_tokens": 0
},
"status": "ready",
"probability": 0.93,
"confidence": 0.93,
"verdict": "fits"
}
Evaluation evidence
No verified live accuracy measurement is available. Evaluate representative cases before using this decision in your workflow.
Use the evaluation guide to measure this decision on your own labeled cases.
Limitations
- Compares the message against the supplied change description, not the repository. A misleading change summary produces a misleading verdict.
- Does not judge message style, ticket references, or conventional-commit formatting.
Related recipes
- summary-coverage: Use summary-coverage to check whether a longer description preserves each specific point of a change.
- change-meaning: Use change-meaning to decide whether an edit to text alters its meaning or is editorial only.