Agent Skills: Design-by-Contract Development Skill

Automated contract verification, detection, and remediation across multiple languages using formal preconditions, postconditions, and invariants. This skill provides both reference documentation AND execution capabilities for the full PLAN -> CREATE -> VERIFY -> REMEDIATE workflow.

UncategorizedID: Microck/ordinary-claude-skills/design-by-contract

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/Microck/ordinary-claude-skills/tree/HEAD/skills_all/design-by-contract

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for design-by-contract.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

skills_all/design-by-contract/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
design-by-contract
Description
Automated contract verification, detection, and remediation across multiple languages using formal preconditions, postconditions, and invariants. This skill provides both reference documentation AND execution capabilities for the full PLAN -> CREATE -> VERIFY -> REMEDIATE workflow.

Design-by-Contract Development Skill

Capability

Design-by-Contract (DbC) is a programming methodology that uses formal specifications (contracts) to define component behavior. This skill enables:

  • Contract Design: Plan preconditions, postconditions, and invariants before implementation
  • Artifact Generation: Create contract annotations across 8+ languages
  • Verification: Run contract validation with appropriate runtime flags
  • Remediation: Fix contract violations with targeted debugging

Core Contract Types:

  • Preconditions: What must be true before a function executes (caller's duty)
  • Postconditions: What must be true after a function executes (callee's promise)
  • Invariants: What must always be true about object state

When to Use

Design-by-Contract is ideal for:

  • Public API boundaries: Validate inputs at module boundaries
  • Critical business logic: Ensure computation correctness
  • State management: Maintain object consistency
  • Integration points: Verify data crossing system boundaries
  • Team collaboration: Document expected behavior formally

Workflow Overview

[<start>Requirements] -> [Phase 1: PLAN]
[Phase 1: PLAN|
  Identify contracts
  Design predicates
  Map obligations
] -> [Phase 2: CREATE]
[Phase 2: CREATE|
  Generate annotations
  Add to .outline/contracts/
  Wire dependencies
] -> [Phase 3: VERIFY]
[Phase 3: VERIFY|
  Enable runtime flags
  Run test suite
  Check violations
] -> [Phase 4: REMEDIATE]
[Phase 4: REMEDIATE|
  Diagnose violation type
  Fix caller/callee/state
  Re-verify
] -> [<end>Success]

Verification Hierarchy

Principle: Use compile-time verification before runtime contracts. If a property can be verified statically, do NOT add a runtime contract for it.

Static Assertions (compile-time) > Test/Debug Contracts > Runtime Contracts

When to Use Each Level

| Property | Static | Test Contract | Debug Contract | Runtime Contract | |----------|--------|---------------|----------------|------------------| | Type size/alignment | static_assert (C++), assert_eq_size! (Rust) | - | - | - | | Trait/interface bounds | assert_impl_all! (Rust), Concepts (C++) | - | - | - | | Const value bounds | const_assert!, static_assert | - | - | - | | Null/type safety | Type checker (tsc/pyright/kotlinc) | - | - | - | | Exhaustiveness | Pattern matching + never/Never | - | - | - | | Expensive O(n)+ checks | - | test_ensures | - | - | | Reference impl equivalence | - | test_ensures | - | - | | Internal state invariants | - | - | debug_invariant | - | | Development preconditions | - | - | debug_requires | - | | Public API input validation | - | - | - | requires | | Safety-critical postconditions | - | - | - | ensures | | External/untrusted data | - | - | - | Required (Zod/icontract) |

Legend: - = Do not use for this property

Decision Flow

Can type system encode it? ──yes──> Use types (typestate, newtype)
         │no
         v
Verifiable at compile-time? ──yes──> static_assertions / const_assert!
         │no
         v
Expensive O(n)+ check? ──yes──> test_* (test builds only)
         │no
         v
Internal development aid? ──yes──> debug_* (debug builds only)
         │no
         v
Must enforce in production? ──yes──> Runtime contracts
         │no
         v
Consider if check is needed at all

Phase 1: PLAN (Contract Design)

Process

  1. Understand Requirements

    • Parse user's task/requirement
    • Identify preconditions, postconditions, invariants
    • Use sequential-thinking to decompose contract obligations
    • Map requirements to contract types
  2. Artifact Detection (Conditional)

    • Check for existing contract artifacts by language:
      # Rust (contracts crate)
      rg '#\[pre\(|#\[post\(|#\[invariant\(' $ARGUMENTS
      # TypeScript (Zod)
      rg 'z\.object|z\.string|\.refine\(' $ARGUMENTS
      # Python (icontract)
      rg '@pre\(|@post\(|@invariant\(' $ARGUMENTS
      # Java/Kotlin
      rg 'checkArgument|checkState|require\s*\{' $ARGUMENTS
      
    • If artifacts exist: analyze coverage gaps, plan extensions
    • If no artifacts: proceed to design contract architecture
  3. Design Contract Architecture

    • Design precondition predicates
    • Plan postcondition guarantees
    • Define class/module invariants
    • Output: Contract design with annotation signatures
  4. Prepare Run Phase

    • Define target: .outline/contracts/
    • Specify verification: language-specific contract checking
    • Create traceability: requirement -> contract -> enforcement

Thinking Tool Integration

Use sequential-thinking for:
- Contract decomposition
- Obligation ordering
- Inheritance chain planning

Use actor-critic-thinking for:
- Contract strength evaluation
- Precondition completeness
- Postcondition sufficiency

Use shannon-thinking for:
- Contract coverage gaps
- Runtime verification costs
- Weakest precondition analysis

Contract Design Templates

Rust (contracts crate)

// Target: .outline/contracts/{module}_contracts.rs

// From requirement: {requirement text}
#[pre(input > 0, "Input must be positive")]
#[post(ret.is_some() => ret.unwrap() > input)]
fn process(input: i32) -> Option<i32> {
    // Implementation in run phase
}

// Class invariant
#[invariant(self.balance >= 0)]
impl Account {
    // Methods maintain invariant
}

TypeScript (Zod)

// Target: .outline/contracts/{module}.contracts.ts

// From requirement: {requirement text}
const InputSchema = z.object({
  value: z.number().positive("Value must be positive"),
}).refine(
  (data) => /* precondition */,
  { message: "Precondition: {description}" }
);

// Postcondition validator
const OutputSchema = z.object({
  result: z.number(),
}).refine(
  (data) => /* postcondition */,
  { message: "Postcondition: {description}" }
);

Python (icontract)

# Target: .outline/contracts/{module}_contracts.py

# From requirement: {requirement text}
@icontract.require(lambda x: x > 0, "Input must be positive")
@icontract.ensure(lambda result: result is not None)
def process(x: int) -> Optional[int]:
    # Implementation in run phase
    pass

Plan Output

  1. Requirements Analysis

    • Preconditions identified
    • Postconditions guaranteed
    • Invariants to maintain
  2. Contract Architecture

    • Contract signatures per function/method
    • Invariant definitions per class/module
    • Inheritance contract chains
  3. Target Artifacts

    • .outline/contracts/* file list
    • Contract library dependencies
    • Runtime flag configuration
  4. Verification Commands

    • Build with contracts enabled
    • Test suite exercising contracts
    • Success criteria: no contract violations

Phase 2: CREATE (Generate Artifacts)

Setup

# Create .outline/contracts directory
mkdir -p .outline/contracts

Generate Contract Files by Language

Rust (contracts crate)

// .outline/contracts/{module}_contracts.rs
// Generated from plan design

use contracts::*;

// Source Requirement: {traceability from plan}

// Precondition: {from plan design}
// Postcondition: {from plan design}
#[pre(input > 0, "Input must be positive")]
#[post(ret.is_some() => ret.unwrap() > input, "Output must exceed input")]
pub fn process(input: i32) -> Option<i32> {
    // Implementation
    Some(input + 1)
}

// Class invariant: {from plan design}
#[invariant(self.balance >= 0, "Balance must be non-negative")]
impl Account {
    #[post(self.balance == old(self.balance) + amount)]
    pub fn deposit(&mut self, amount: u64) {
        self.balance += amount;
    }
}

TypeScript (Zod)

// .outline/contracts/{module}.contracts.ts
// Generated from plan design

import { z } from 'zod';

// Source Requirement: {traceability from plan}

// Precondition schema: {from plan design}
export const InputSchema = z.object({
  value: z.number().positive("Value must be positive"),
  name: z.string().min(1, "Name required"),
}).refine(
  (data) => data.value < 1000,
  { message: "Precondition: value must be under 1000" }
);

// Postcondition schema: {from plan design}
export const OutputSchema = z.object({
  result: z.number(),
  success: z.boolean(),
}).refine(
  (data) => data.success || data.result === 0,
  { message: "Postcondition: failed operations must return 0" }
);

// Validation wrapper
export function withContracts<I, O>(
  inputSchema: z.ZodType<I>,
  outputSchema: z.ZodType<O>,
  fn: (input: I) => O
): (input: I) => O {
  return (input: I) => {
    const validInput = inputSchema.parse(input);
    const output = fn(validInput);
    return outputSchema.parse(output);
  };
}

Python (icontract)

# .outline/contracts/{module}_contracts.py
# Generated from plan design

import icontract

# Source Requirement: {traceability from plan}

# Precondition: {from plan design}
# Postcondition: {from plan design}
@icontract.require(lambda x: x > 0, "Input must be positive")
@icontract.ensure(lambda result: result is not None, "Must return value")
@icontract.ensure(lambda x, result: result > x, "Output must exceed input")
def process(x: int) -> int:
    return x + 1


# Class invariant: {from plan design}
@icontract.invariant(lambda self: self.balance >= 0)
class Account:
    def __init__(self):
        self.balance = 0

    @icontract.require(lambda amount: amount > 0)
    @icontract.ensure(lambda self, amount, OLD: self.balance == OLD.balance + amount)
    def deposit(self, amount: int) -> None:
        self.balance += amount

Phase 3: VERIFY (Contract Validation)

Rust

# Ensure contracts are enabled (not disabled)
unset CONTRACTS_DISABLE

# Verify contracts exist
rg '#\[pre\(|#\[post\(|#\[invariant\(' .outline/contracts/ || exit 12

# Run tests with contracts
cargo test || exit 13

TypeScript

# Verify Zod schemas exist
rg 'z\.object|\.refine\(' .outline/contracts/ || exit 12

# Run tests (Zod validates at runtime)
npx vitest run || exit 13

Python

# Enable thorough contract checking
export ICONTRACT_SLOW=true

# Verify decorators exist
rg '@icontract\.(require|ensure|invariant)' .outline/contracts/ || exit 12

# Run tests
pytest || exit 13

Java (Guava)

# Verify Guava preconditions exist
rg 'checkArgument|checkState|checkNotNull' .outline/contracts/ || exit 12

# Run tests
mvn test || exit 13

C++ (GSL/Boost)

# Ensure NDEBUG is NOT set for contract checking
unset NDEBUG

# Verify contracts exist
rg 'Expects\(|Ensures\(' .outline/contracts/ || exit 12

# Build and test
cmake --build build && ./build/tests || exit 13

Phase 4: REMEDIATE (Fix Violations)

Contract Violation Types

| Violation | Exit Code | Fix Strategy | |-----------|-----------|--------------| | Precondition | 1 | Fix caller to meet requirements | | Postcondition | 2 | Fix implementation to meet guarantee | | Invariant | 3 | Fix state management logic |

Debugging by Violation Type

Precondition Violation (Caller's fault)

# Error: icontract.ViolationError: Pre: x > 0
# The CALLER passed invalid input

# Debug: Check call site
# Before:
result = process(-5)  # WRONG: violates x > 0

# After:
if x > 0:
    result = process(x)
else:
    handle_invalid_input(x)

Postcondition Violation (Callee's fault)

# Error: icontract.ViolationError: Post: result > x
# The IMPLEMENTATION doesn't meet its guarantee

# Debug: Fix the function
# Before:
@icontract.ensure(lambda x, result: result > x)
def process(x: int) -> int:
    return x  # WRONG: not > x

# After:
@icontract.ensure(lambda x, result: result > x)
def process(x: int) -> int:
    return x + 1  # Correct

Invariant Violation (State corruption)

# Error: icontract.ViolationError: Inv: self.balance >= 0
# Object state became invalid after operation

# Debug: Find state mutation that breaks invariant
# Before:
@icontract.invariant(lambda self: self.balance >= 0)
class Account:
    def withdraw(self, amount):
        self.balance -= amount  # WRONG: can go negative

# After:
    @icontract.require(lambda self, amount: amount <= self.balance)
    def withdraw(self, amount):
        self.balance -= amount  # Now protected by precondition

Contract Patterns

Precondition (Caller's Duty)

INPUT --> VALIDATE --> PROCESS
            |
            v
         FAIL FAST if invalid

Postcondition (Callee's Promise)

PROCESS --> OUTPUT --> VALIDATE
                          |
                          v
                       ASSERT guarantee met

Invariant (Always True)

OPERATION --> STATE CHANGE --> CHECK INVARIANT
                                  |
                                  v
                               ASSERT still valid

Commands Reference

dbc-verify

Verify all contracts satisfied in codebase.

Usage: dbc-verify [--lang LANG] [--path PATH] [--runtime-flags]

Algorithm:

1. Detect language(s) in scope (fd file extensions)
2. Check runtime flags enabled per language
3. Scan for contract library usage (rg patterns)
4. Execute language-specific verification
5. Report violations with exit codes

dbc-detect

Detect contract usage and missing contracts.

Usage: dbc-detect [--lang LANG] [--missing] [--violations]

Algorithm:

1. Scan for contract library imports (rg)
2. Find functions without contracts (ast-grep negative match)
3. Identify contract violations (pattern analysis)
4. Generate coverage report

dbc-remediate

Auto-fix violations or add missing contracts.

Usage: dbc-remediate [--add-missing] [--fix-violations] [--dry-run]

Algorithm:

1. Identify remediation targets (missing/violated contracts)
2. Generate contract code per language
3. Apply fixes via ast-grep or native-patch
4. Verify fixes with dbc-verify

Exit Codes

| Code | Meaning | Action | |------|---------|--------| | 0 | All contracts pass | Ready for deployment | | 1 | Precondition fail | Fix caller to meet requirements | | 2 | Postcondition fail | Fix implementation | | 3 | Invariant fail | Fix state management | | 11 | Library missing | Install contract library | | 12 | No contracts | Run plan phase, create contracts | | 13 | Verification failed | Debug and fix violations |


Language-Specific Implementations

Rust Detection

# Find contracts
rg '#\[pre\(|#\[post\(|#\[invariant\(|debug_assert!' --type rust

# Find functions without contracts
ast-grep -p 'fn $NAME($$$) { $$$ }' -l rust | \
  rg -v '#\[pre\(|debug_assert!' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

#[pre($CONDITION)]
#[post(ret $POSTCONDITION)]
fn $NAME($PARAMS) -> $RET {
    debug_assert!($CONDITION, "$ERROR_MSG");
    $BODY
}

Runtime flags: Check CARGO_BUILD_TYPE != release or cfg(debug_assertions)

TypeScript Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'z\.object|invariant\(|\.parse\(|\.safeParse\(' --type ts

# Find functions without validation
ast-grep -p 'function $NAME($$$): $$$ { $$$ }' -l typescript | \
  rg -v 'z\.|invariant' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

const ${NAME}Schema = z.object({
  $FIELDS
});

function $NAME(params: unknown): $RET {
  const validated = ${NAME}Schema.parse(params);
  invariant($CONDITION, "$ERROR_MSG");
  $BODY
}

Runtime flags: Check process.env.NODE_ENV === 'development'

Python Detection

# Find contracts
rg '@pre\(|@post\(|@invariant|@require|@ensure' --type python

# Find functions without contracts
ast-grep -p 'def $NAME($$$): $$$' -l python | \
  rg -v '@pre|@post|@invariant' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

@pre(lambda $PARAMS: $CONDITION)
@post(lambda result: $POSTCONDITION)
def $NAME($PARAMS) -> $RET:
    """$DOCSTRING"""
    $BODY

Runtime flags: Check __debug__ is True (not python -O)

Java Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'checkArgument|checkState|validate\(|Preconditions\.' --type java

# Find methods without contracts
ast-grep -p 'public $RET $NAME($$$) { $$$ }' -l java | \
  rg -v 'checkArgument|validate' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

public $RET $NAME($PARAMS) {
    checkArgument($CONDITION, "$ERROR_MSG");
    $BODY
    validate($POSTCONDITION, "$POST_ERROR");
    return $RESULT;
}

Runtime flags: Check assertions enabled with -ea flag

Kotlin Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'contract \{|Either<|Validated|require\(|check\(' --type kotlin

# Find functions without contracts
ast-grep -p 'fun $NAME($$$): $$$ { $$$ }' -l kotlin | \
  rg -v 'contract|require|check' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

fun $NAME($PARAMS): Either<$ERR, $RET> {
    contract {
        returns() implies ($CONDITION)
    }
    return if (!$CONDITION) "$ERROR".left()
           else { $BODY }.right()
}

Runtime flags: Check -ea for JVM assertions

C# Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'Guard\.Against|Contract\.Requires|Contract\.Ensures|Debug\.Assert' --type cs

# Find methods without contracts
ast-grep -p 'public $RET $NAME($$$) { $$$ }' -l csharp | \
  rg -v 'Guard\.|Contract\.' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

public $RET $NAME($PARAMS) {
    Guard.Against.Null($PARAM, nameof($PARAM));
    Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<$RET>() $POSTCONDITION);
    $BODY
}

Runtime flags: Check Debug configuration

C++ Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'Expects\(|Ensures\(|boost::contract|gsl::' --type cpp

# Find functions without contracts
ast-grep -p '$RET $NAME($$$) { $$$ }' -l cpp | \
  rg -v 'Expects|Ensures' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

$RET $NAME($PARAMS) {
    Expects($PRECONDITION);
    $BODY
    Ensures($POSTCONDITION);
    return $RESULT;
}

Runtime flags: Check NDEBUG not defined

C Detection

# Find contracts
rg 'assert\(|static_assert' --type c

# Find functions without asserts
ast-grep -p '$RET $NAME($$$) { $$$ }' -l c | \
  rg -v 'assert\(' --files-without-match

Remediation template:

$RET $NAME($PARAMS) {
    assert($PRECONDITION && "$ERROR_MSG");
    $BODY
    assert($POSTCONDITION && "$POST_ERROR");
    return $RESULT;
}

Runtime flags: Check NDEBUG not defined


Contract Library Matrix

| Language | Library | Runtime Flag | |----------|---------|--------------| | Rust | contracts | CONTRACTS_DISABLE | | TypeScript | Zod | (always active) | | Python | icontract | ICONTRACT_SLOW | | Java | Guava | (always active) | | Kotlin | native | (always active) | | C# | Guard | (always active) | | C++ | GSL/Boost | NDEBUG |


Error Handling Matrix

| Language | Contract Library | Error Type | Error Handling | Recovery Strategy | |----------|-----------------|------------|----------------|-------------------| | Rust | contracts, prusti | panic! | catch_unwind (discouraged) | Result/Option types | | TypeScript | zod, io-ts | ZodError, thrown | try/catch | Either/Result pattern | | Python | dpcontracts, icontract | AssertionError | try/except | Optional/Result | | Java | Guava, Bean Validation | IllegalArgumentException | try/catch | Optional/Either | | Kotlin | Arrow, require/check | IllegalArgumentException | try/catch | Either<E, A> | | C# | Code Contracts, Guard | ArgumentException | try/catch | Result<T> | | C++ | GSL, Boost.Contract | std::terminate | noexcept | std::expected | | C | assert.h | abort() | Signal handler | Return codes |

Error Message Best Practices

Contract Type: [PRECONDITION|POSTCONDITION|INVARIANT]
Location: file.rs:42 in function_name()
Condition: x > 0 && x < 100
Actual Value: x = -5
Expected: Positive integer less than 100
Context: Processing user input for order ID

Troubleshooting Guide

Common Issues

| Symptom | Cause | Resolution | |---------|-------|------------| | Exit 1 | Precondition violation | Caller must provide valid input (fix call site) | | Exit 2 | Postcondition violation | Implementation doesn't meet guarantee (fix function) | | Exit 3 | Invariant violation | Object state became invalid (fix state mutation) | | Exit 11 | Contract library missing | Install: pip install icontract, cargo add contracts, npm i zod | | Exit 12 | No contract annotations | Run plan phase first | | Exit 13 | Tests failed with contracts | Debug violation type | | CONTRACTS_DISABLE set | Contracts silently skipped | unset CONTRACTS_DISABLE | | No error but wrong behavior | Contract too weak | Strengthen pre/post conditions | | Performance impact | Contracts in hot path | Use @icontract.require(enabled=DEBUG) | | Contract not firing | Debug assertions disabled | Check NDEBUG, -O flags | | False positive | Contract too strict | Review expected vs actual | | False negative | Contract too weak | Add edge case tests | | Stack overflow | Recursive contract | Check for cycles | | Flaky failures | Race condition in contract | Add synchronization |

Quick Diagnostics

# Check if contracts are enabled (Rust)
cargo build && rg 'debug_assert' target/debug/*.d

# Check if contracts are enabled (Node.js)
node -e "console.log(process.env.NODE_ENV)"

# Check if assertions enabled (Java)
java -ea -version 2>&1 | head -1

# Check if assertions enabled (C/C++)
cpp -dM /dev/null | grep NDEBUG

Debugging Commands

# Python - Verbose contract errors
ICONTRACT_SLOW=true pytest -v --tb=long

# Python - Find contract decorators
rg '@icontract\.(require|ensure|invariant)' src/

# Rust - Enable backtrace
RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo test

# Rust - Find contract attributes
rg '#\[(pre|post|invariant)\(' src/

# TypeScript - Verbose Zod errors
DEBUG=zod:* npm test

# TypeScript - Find Zod schemas
rg 'z\.(object|refine|string|number)' src/

# General - Check contracts not disabled
env | rg -i 'contract|ndebug'

Debugging Contract Violation Workflows

Precondition Violation Debugging

  1. Identify the violation location:

    # Run with debug symbols
    RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo run   # Rust
    node --enable-source-maps    # Node.js
    python -c "import traceback" # Python
    
  2. Examine the call stack:

    • Find the caller that provided invalid input
    • Check intermediate transformations that corrupted data
  3. Add tracing at contract boundary:

    // Rust example
    #[pre(x > 0)]
    fn process(x: i32) {
        tracing::debug!("process called with x = {}", x);
        // ...
    }
    
  4. Common causes:

    • Unvalidated user input
    • Null/None propagation
    • Integer overflow in computation
    • Incorrect API usage

Postcondition Violation Debugging

  1. Instrument the function exit:

    // TypeScript example
    function calculate(x: number): number {
      const result = /* computation */;
      console.log(`calculate returning: ${result}`);
      invariant(result > 0, `Expected positive, got ${result}`);
      return result;
    }
    
  2. Check intermediate state:

    • Add assertions at each computation step
    • Verify loop invariants maintained
  3. Common causes:

    • Logic error in computation
    • Incorrect formula
    • Edge case not handled
    • Floating point precision loss

Invariant Violation Debugging

  1. Track state transitions:

    # Python example with dpcontracts
    @invariant(lambda self: self.balance >= 0)
    class Account:
        def __init__(self):
            self._log_state("init")
    
        def withdraw(self, amount):
            self._log_state(f"before withdraw {amount}")
            self.balance -= amount
            self._log_state(f"after withdraw {amount}")
    
  2. Find mutation that breaks invariant:

    • Identify all state-mutating methods
    • Check each mutation point
  3. Common causes:

    • Missing validation in setter
    • Concurrent modification
    • Deserialization bypassing constructor

Common Pitfalls and Solutions

Pitfall 1: Contracts with Side Effects

Problem: Contract check modifies program state.

Solution:

// WRONG: Contract has side effect
#[pre(counter.increment() > 0)]  // Modifies counter!
fn process() { ... }

// RIGHT: Contract is pure
#[pre(counter.value() > 0)]  // Only reads counter
fn process() { ... }

Pitfall 2: Expensive Contract Checks

Problem: Contract check is O(n) or worse, causing performance issues.

Solution:

// WRONG: O(n) check on every call
function process(items: Item[]) {
  invariant(items.every(i => isValid(i)), "All items must be valid");
  // Called millions of times...
}

// RIGHT: Check once at boundary, trust internally
function publicApi(items: Item[]) {
  const validated = items.filter(isValid);  // Validate at boundary
  processInternal(validated);  // Internal trusts input
}

Pitfall 3: Incomplete Error Context

Problem: Contract failure message doesn't help debugging.

Solution:

# WRONG: No context
assert x > 0

# RIGHT: Full context
assert x > 0, f"Expected positive x, got {x} (type={type(x).__name__}, caller={inspect.stack()[1].function})"

Pitfall 4: Contracts Disabled in Production

Problem: Critical contracts disabled, bugs reach production.

Solution:

// Separate debug-only from critical contracts
#[cfg(debug_assertions)]
debug_assert!(validation_heavy_check());  // Debug only

// Critical contracts always enabled
assert!(user_id.is_valid(), "Invalid user ID");  // Always runs

Pitfall 5: Circular Contract Dependencies

Problem: Contract A checks contract B which checks contract A.

Solution:

// WRONG: Circular dependency
class A {
    @Requires("b.isValid()")  // Calls B
    void process(B b) { ... }
}
class B {
    @Requires("a.isValid()")  // Calls A, which calls B...
    void validate(A a) { ... }
}

// RIGHT: Break cycle with primitive checks
class A {
    @Requires("b.id != null && b.state == State.READY")
    void process(B b) { ... }
}

Contract Strength Guidelines

Too Weak (misses bugs)

@icontract.require(lambda x: True)  # Useless
def divide(x, y):
    return x / y  # Will crash on y=0

Appropriate Strength

@icontract.require(lambda y: y != 0, "Divisor must be non-zero")
@icontract.ensure(lambda x, y, result: abs(result * y - x) < 1e-10)
def divide(x, y):
    return x / y

Too Strong (rejects valid inputs)

@icontract.require(lambda x: x > 0 and x < 100)  # Overly restrictive
def process(x):
    return x * 2  # Works for any number

Contract Composition Patterns

Layered Contracts

Public API Layer:    [Strong Preconditions]
                            |
Service Layer:       [Moderate Preconditions]
                            |
Domain Layer:        [Minimal Preconditions + Strong Invariants]
                            |
Infrastructure:      [Postconditions on I/O]

Contract Inheritance

// Base contract
interface Processor {
    @Requires("input != null")
    @Ensures("result != null")
    Result process(Input input);
}

// Subtype strengthens postcondition (allowed)
// Subtype weakens precondition (allowed)
class SafeProcessor implements Processor {
    @Requires("true")  // Weaker: accepts any input
    @Ensures("result != null && result.isValid()")  // Stronger: guarantees validity
    Result process(Input input) { ... }
}

Contract Refinement

// Start with weak contract, refine as understanding grows
// Version 1: Basic
fun process(x: Int): Int {
    require(true) { "No constraints yet" }
    // ...
}

// Version 2: After discovering constraints
fun process(x: Int): Int {
    require(x > 0) { "x must be positive" }
    // ...
}

// Version 3: After discovering more constraints
fun process(x: Int): Int {
    require(x in 1..1000) { "x must be between 1 and 1000" }
    // ...
}

When NOT to Use Design-by-Contract

| Scenario | Better Alternative | |----------|-------------------| | Proving mathematical properties | Proof-driven (Lean 4) | | Compile-time guarantees | Type-driven (Idris 2) | | Complex state machine correctness | Validation-first (Quint) | | Performance-critical inner loops | Disable in release, use types | | Third-party library integration | Wrapper with contracts at boundary | | Already have strong types | Contracts may be redundant |


Complementary Approaches

  • Contract + Type-driven: Types encode structure, contracts encode behavior
  • Contract + Test-driven: Contracts as executable specs, tests for coverage
  • Contract + Property-based: Contracts define valid space, property tests explore it

Safety Requirements

  1. No side effects: Contract checks must not modify state
  2. Performance: Disable expensive checks in release builds
  3. Thread safety: Contracts must be thread-safe
  4. Memory safety: No allocations in hot paths
  5. Determinism: Same inputs produce same contract evaluation

Best Practices

  1. Boundary validation: Add preconditions at all public API boundaries
  2. Critical postconditions: Use postconditions for guarantees that affect downstream code
  3. State invariants: Add invariants at construction and after state mutations
  4. Fail fast: Include clear error messages with context
  5. Graduated deployment: Disable expensive contracts in production (when safe)
  6. Type composition: Combine contracts with type system for compile-time checks
  7. Documentation: Document contract rationale in comments
  8. Testing: Test contract violations explicitly in unit tests

Performance Considerations

| Aspect | Development | Production | |--------|-------------|------------| | Preconditions | Always enabled | Critical only | | Postconditions | Always enabled | Disabled | | Invariants | Full checking | Disabled | | Logging | Verbose | Minimal | | Cost per check | O(1) acceptable | O(1) required |

Optimization Strategies

// Conditional compilation
#[cfg(debug_assertions)]
fn expensive_check() { ... }

// Feature flags
#[cfg(feature = "contracts")]
fn contract_check() { ... }

// Inline for hot paths
#[inline(always)]
fn fast_precondition() { ... }

Integration Workflow

[<start>Start] -> [dbc-detect]
[dbc-detect] found contracts -> [dbc-verify]
[dbc-detect] no contracts -> [dbc-remediate --add-missing]
[dbc-verify] pass -> [<end>Success]
[dbc-verify] fail -> [dbc-remediate --fix-violations]
[dbc-remediate --add-missing] -> [dbc-verify]
[dbc-remediate --fix-violations] -> [dbc-verify]

Resources