Loading...
Loading...
Found 29 Skills
Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability. Triggers when: user asks about test quality, shares test files for review, or expresses frustration: "tests keep breaking whenever I change anything", "our tests take forever", "I can't understand what this test is doing", "tests pass but bugs still reach production", "we have too many mocks". Do NOT trigger for: writing new tests from scratch (use the regular test-writing workflow) or testing framework/syntax questions — this skill reviews an existing suite for structural quality problems, not individual test authoring.
Execute development tasks with skeleton-first approach and layered TDD. Includes optional adversarial verification (code quality + test completeness review). Use when users start working on a task (T-XX), need development guidance, or implement features/bugfixes. Triggers on keywords like "execute task", "start T-XX", "implement", "develop", "开发任务", "执行任务", "对抗式验证", "--review".
Review InboxMate demos waiting for QA. Finds CRM opportunities at SCREENING with demoStatus=PENDING_REVIEW, opens each demo link, checks quality, and flags as OK_TO_SEND or NEEDS_FIX with a note explaining why.
MUST be used whenever reviewing a Dune app for code quality, maintainability, or clean code issues — before a PR review, after a feature is complete, or when the user asks for a code review. Do NOT skip linting steps. Triggers: code quality, code review, clean code, refactor, maintainability, technical debt, any type, naming, dead code, duplication, DRY, single responsibility, component size, lint, linting, TypeScript strict, dependency injection, file structure.
Standalone quality review for Elastic integrations. Classifies files by domain, loads domain-specific skills and review checklists, applies cross-domain consistency rules, CEL version verification, API conformance, and severity calibration. Input-agnostic: works on local packages, PR diffs, or branch comparisons. Use when reviewing integration quality independently of any build or fix workflow.
Use when reviewing a plan before implementation begins. Not for autonomous plan analysis — use plan-review agent instead. Challenges scope, walks through architecture/quality/tests/performance interactively with mandatory user checkpoints and opinionated recommendations.
Use when reviewing, fixing, or improving an EXISTING Elastic integration package. Covers quality reviews, targeted fixes (pipelines, field mappings, CEL programs, manifests, changelogs), full improvement passes, and minor adjustments. Use create-integration instead when creating a new package or adding a new data stream from scratch.
Unified codebase quality review: merge readiness verdict + maintainability (Clean Code) + docs-vs-code consistency. Use for code review, quality check, refactor check, outdated docs check, or merge/production readiness.
Automated tooling and detection patterns for JavaScript/TypeScript code quality review
Final pass to identify missed items, edge cases, and risks before considering a scope done
Review implementation quality — catch visual bugs, placeholder text, broken links, and spec drift that functional tests miss. Use this after tests pass to ensure the output looks right, not just works right.