Skip to main content

liquid-review

Review explicitly authorized JS/TS source files or a Git diff with Liquid before release, preserving real candidates, hashes and coverage. Use for security review requests, not to certify deployment.

معلومات المصدر

المستودع
criptogus/liquid-cybersecurity-plugin
آخر نشاط في المصدر
١٦ أكتوبر ٢٠٢٦ في ٠٩:٢٩
لغة SKILL.md المكتشفة
الإنجليزية
النجوم
٠
التفرعات
٠

خيارات التثبيت

يُحدَّد Prompt الذي يراجع المصدر أولًا بشكل افتراضي. يمكنك التبديل إلى أمر مباشر أو تنزيل نسخة محلية.

مراجعة ملفات المصدر

اقرأ SKILL.md وأي ملفات مرافقة يعرضها SkillsMP قبل أن تقرر التثبيت.

عرض SKILL.md

SKILL.md
تعليمات المصدر · معاينة للقراءة فقط
name
liquid-review
description
Review explicitly authorized JS/TS source files or a Git diff with Liquid before release, preserving real candidates, hashes and coverage. Use for security review requests, not to certify deployment.
# Review selected source Follow `../../rules/liquid-boundaries.mdc`. Use discovered Liquid schemas. 1. Resolve the exact 40-character hexadecimal candidate commit. Select the smallest useful file set and relevant local imports within the supported limits. Confirm that the user authorizes sending these specific bytes to Liquid. A request to install the plugin is not upload authorization. 2. Check the source is within the current schema limits: the documented MCP limit is 20 files and 48 KB total UTF-8. The website trial's separate 12,000 byte allowance is not an MCP entitlement. Do not silently truncate. 3. Call `liquid_review_code` with `commitSha`, `authorizedSource: true`, and `files: [{path, content}]`. Do not execute source or test a target. For an explicitly requested diff, use `liquid_review_diff` with the exact `baseCommitSha`, candidate `commitSha`, authorization and unified `diff`. 4. Report only the real returned status, engine and candidates, with original ID, rule, severity, file, line and column when present. Preserve each manifest SHA-256 and `provenance`. If no candidate is returned, say that; do not add your own observation to the tool's findings array. 5. Explain submitted-content-only scope, no Git authentication of caller labels, no runtime/dependency/full-repository evidence, and the returned limitations. Diff coverage remains partial. Keep `deploymentApproved=false` visible. A transport/auth/parse failure is a failure, not a clean result. Only with permission may you save a source-free receipt in the user's workspace. Do not create tracking events or persist source as a side effect. If the user asks for broader coverage, describe the human-approved repository review path. Do not prepare paid work, open approval links, or quote cached prices merely because candidates appeared. Do not use severity to pressure a sale.
عرض على GitHub