dbt-plan
Static analysis tool that warns about risky DDL changes before dbt run.
Like terraform plan for dbt, and used the same way: you run it before the thing
that changes your warehouse, not only in CI afterwards.
Runs on compiled SQL. It reads files and nothing else, so it works with any warehouse — Snowflake, BigQuery, Redshift, Postgres, DuckDB — through one code path.
What It Looks Like
$ dbt-plan check
dbt-plan -- 2 model(s) changed
DESTRUCTIVE int_order_enriched (incremental, sync_all_columns)
DROP COLUMN shipping_info
DROP COLUMN billing_info
ADD COLUMN shipping_city
Downstream: dim_customers, fct_orders (2 model(s))
>> BROKEN_REF fct_orders: references dropped column(s): shipping_info
SAFE dim_customers (table)
CREATE OR REPLACE TABLE
dbt-plan: 2 checked, 1 safe, 0 warning, 1 destructive, 1 cascade risk(s)
What It Does
dbt-plan analyzes compiled SQL diffs to catch dangerous schema changes at PR time:
- Column changes: detects ADD/DROP COLUMN from SQL diff
- Risk assessment: judges safety based on materialization x on_schema_change rules
- Cascade analysis: finds downstream models broken by a dropped column — the ones that
name it, resolved against the project's own schema rather than matched as text; the ones
that select
*and lose it without their own file changing; and the tests whose fixtures pin it down. Names the exposures whose owners need telling - Contracts: reports a change an enforced contract will reject, in either direction
- Config changes: detects materialization or on_schema_change policy changes
- Type changes: compares explicit
CASTtypes between revisions SELECT *resolution: reads the columns from the CTEs of the same statement, and follows aref()into the referenced model's compiled SQL
It does NOT execute anything, connect to any warehouse, or simulate dbt run. It reads files, compares them, and warns you.
Quick Start
pip install dbt-plan
dbt-plan run # compile baseline → compile current → check
dbt-plan run does the whole thing in one command, and needs whatever credentials your
dbt compile normally needs.
The loop it is built for
Once you have a baseline, the inner loop is a single sub-second command. Edit a model or a
macro, recompile, and see what dbt run would do — before running it:
dbt-plan snapshot # once, on the revision you are changing from
# ... edit models, edit macros ...
dbt compile && dbt-plan check
Measured on a project of 3 models, median of 3 runs:
| step | time |
|---|---|
dbt compile (Fusion) | 1.8 – 3.8 s |
dbt-plan check | 0.11 s |
dbt-plan snapshot | 0.10 s |
200 models, every one of them changed: 0.48 s. The compile is the cost, and you were compiling anyway — dbt-plan itself is fast enough to sit in the edit loop rather than at the end of it.
Working with a coding agent
An agent editing models cannot eyeball a diff and hesitate. Give it the check and the reasons behind it:
dbt-plan agent-setup # writes dbt-plan guidance into your AGENTS.md
dbt-plan check --format json
The guidance leads with what an agent most often gets wrong: adding a model to
ignore_models, or downgrading on_schema_change from sync_all_columns to ignore,
silences a real finding without making the change safe.
Or give it the check as an MCP tool:
pip install 'dbt-plan[mcp]'
dbt-plan-mcp # stdio MCP server exposing `plan` and `snapshot`
plan returns the verdict, the per-model operations, and — separately — a refusals
list naming everything dbt-plan declined to judge. That separation is the point: a person
reading "safe" may still glance at the diff, an agent reading it proceeds, so a
non-empty refusals must never be collapsed into the verdict.
The server is a separate package from the analysis core. The core is offline and
synchronous by design and tests/test_invariants.py fails the build on an asyncio or
network import anywhere inside it; an MCP server is both, so keeping them apart is what
keeps that guarantee provable.
Registry entry — the line below is how the MCP registry verifies that whoever publishes the entry also owns this PyPI package, so it has to stay in the README that ships:
mcp-name: io.github.PresentJay/dbt-plan
More commands
dbt-plan init # Generate .dbt-plan.yml config + update .gitignore
dbt-plan stats # Analyze project readiness
dbt-plan ci-setup # Generate GitHub Actions workflow
dbt-plan check --format github # GitHub markdown output
dbt-plan check --format json # JSON for CI pipelines
dbt-plan run --against main # compare with where this branch left main
dbt-plan check --select fct_orders # one model
dbt-plan check --select fct_orders+ # it and everything downstream
Scope
dbt-plan is a static analysis warning tool, not a runtime simulator.
| In scope | Out of scope |
|---|---|
| Column ADD/DROP detection from compiled SQL | dbt run simulation |
| materialization × on_schema_change risk rules | Warehouse connection |
| Cascade: broken refs, build failures, inherited column loss | seed / source change detection |
| Config change detection (materialization, osc) | pre_hook / post_hook DDL analysis |
| Unit test fixtures and exposure owners downstream | seed / source fixtures dbt-plan cannot read |
| Enforced-contract violations: names, and types by family | Contract types compared more finely than family |
Explicit CAST type changes | Type changes on uncast columns |
SELECT * resolved through CTEs and ref() | SELECT * over a source or a raw table |
| CI exit codes + structured output | full_refresh mode judgment |
Design principle: false warnings are OK, false safe is never OK.
When to use it
dbt-plan answers a narrower question than the warehouse-connected tools (Recce, SQLMesh, data-diff) and costs nothing to run, so it works as the cheap gate in front of them — and on the Fusion engine, which compiles without a warehouse connection, that includes fork pull requests where they cannot run at all. See use cases for the comparison, real timings, and what it gets wrong.
Deliberately Not Planned
Ideas that look useful but contradict what this tool is:
| Idea | Why not |
|---|---|
| INFORMATION_SCHEMA query | Requires a warehouse connection. dbt-plan reads files and nothing else, which is what lets it run wherever its input exists — including a fork's pull request, once the project compiles on Fusion. |
Type changes on columns with no explicit CAST | The type is whatever the warehouse assigned, so seeing a change would mean asking it. Columns that are cast explicitly on both sides are compared — see below. |
DDL Prediction Rules
| Materialization | on_schema_change | Predicted DDL | Safety |
|---|---|---|---|
| table | any | CREATE OR REPLACE TABLE | SAFE |
| view | any | CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW | SAFE |
| ephemeral | any | (no physical object) | SAFE |
| snapshot | any | REVIEW REQUIRED | WARNING |
| incremental | ignore | no DDL | SAFE |
| incremental | fail | build failure | WARNING |
| incremental | append_new_columns | ADD COLUMN only | SAFE |
| incremental | sync_all_columns | ADD + DROP COLUMN | DESTRUCTIVE if columns removed |
| any | (model removed) | MODEL REMOVED | DESTRUCTIVE |
| any | (unknown osc) | UNKNOWN on_schema_change | WARNING |
| materialized_view / custom | (not set by you) | UNKNOWN materialization | WARNING |
| materialized_view / custom | (you set one) | follows the incremental rules | per osc |
| any | (contract: {enforced: true}) | CONTRACT VIOLATION | WARNING |
Under a contract, a column's declared data_type is compared with its explicit CAST,
by family -- text against number against date/time against boolean. varchar and text
are the same family and not a finding; varchar and integer are a build failure.
Comparing more finely means a per-adapter type table, and a wrong answer about a type is
worse than no answer.
"Not set by you" means the author wrote no on_schema_change, in the model or in
dbt_project.yml. dbt resolves one for every model regardless, so the resolved value
asserts nothing; an explicit setting is a claim about how that materialization behaves
and is honoured. dbt-plan reads unrendered_config to tell them apart.
An enforced contract inverts the rules above: dbt requires every column to be declared,
so a column added to the SQL fails the build just as a removed one does. Names only —
dbt compares its declared data_type against the warehouse, which dbt-plan does not read.
CI Integration (GitHub Actions)
name: dbt-plan
on:
pull_request:
paths: ['models/**', 'macros/**', 'dbt_project.yml']
jobs:
plan:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
env:
# Whatever your profiles.yml reads. `dbt compile` connects; dbt-plan does not.
SNOWFLAKE_ACCOUNT: ${{ secrets.SNOWFLAKE_ACCOUNT }}
SNOWFLAKE_USER: ${{ secrets.SNOWFLAKE_USER }}
SNOWFLAKE_PRIVATE_KEY: ${{ secrets.SNOWFLAKE_PRIVATE_KEY }}
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0 # the base revision has to be in the clone
persist-credentials: false
- uses: actions/setup-python@v5
with: { python-version: '3.12' }
- run: pip install uv && uv sync
- uses: PresentJay/dbt-plan@v1
Keep the pull_request trigger. Never switch it to pull_request_target — dbt compile
runs Jinja and macros written in the pull request, so that would hand your warehouse
credentials to code from any fork.
| Input | Default | |
|---|---|---|
compile-command | dbt compile | Runs twice, once per revision. |
base-ref | the PR base | The revision to compare against. |
project-dir | . | dbt project directory. |
dialect | the manifest's adapter_type, else snowflake | sqlglot dialect for parsing compiled SQL. Set this only to override what your project already says. |
version | latest | Pin a dbt-plan release. |
fail-on | destructive | Or warning, or never. |
summary | true | Write the report to the job step summary. |
Outputs verdict (safe / destructive / warning), exit-code, and report
(path to the JSON report), so a later step can comment on the PR or open a ticket.
For a workflow you own outright rather than a wrapped action, dbt-plan ci-setup
generates one with the credential wiring and least-privilege notes inline. Details in
docs/ci-integration.md.
How It Works
flowchart TD
A[dbt-plan snapshot] --> B[Save compiled SQL + manifest.json]
C[dbt-plan check] --> D[diff_compiled_dirs]
D --> E[base compiled SQL]
D --> F[current compiled SQL]
E --> G[extract_columns]
F --> H[extract_columns]
G --> I[base columns]
H --> J[current columns]
I --> K[column diff]
J --> K
K --> L[predict_ddl + manifest config]
L --> M{Safety?}
M -->|SAFE| N[exit 0]
M -->|WARNING| O[exit 2]
M -->|DESTRUCTIVE| P[exit 1 — block merge]
L --> Q[find_downstream]
Q --> R[format_text / format_github]
Contributing
See CONTRIBUTING.md for development setup, TDD workflow, and coding rules.
Architecture
src/dbt_plan/
├── columns.py # SQLGlot column extraction (multi-dialect)
├── config.py # .dbt-plan.yml + env var configuration
├── predictor.py # DDL risk assessment rules + cascade analysis
├── manifest.py # manifest.json parsing + downstream BFS
├── diff.py # compiled SQL directory comparison
├── formatter.py # text / GitHub markdown / JSON output
└── cli.py # CLI: snapshot, check, init, stats, run, ci-setup
How to Contribute
Where to start: the open issues, particularly those labelled good first issue. Each one says what it is, how it was found, and what has to be decided before code.
Design decisions: See docs/design-notes.md.
Supported
- dbt-core 1.7+, and the dbt Fusion engine (verified against
2.0.0-preview.218) - Any warehouse: Snowflake, BigQuery, Redshift, Postgres, DuckDB, etc. — read from the manifest, no flag needed
- Python 3.10+
- CTE, UNION ALL, QUALIFY, window functions, VARIANT access
License
Apache-2.0