القائمة
Compares API endpoints between any two repositories by auto-discovering their frameworks (Express, Supabase, etc.) and identifying missing or changed routes.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Hands off completed work to QA by merging the PR into the integration branch, posting a testing guide on the Fizzy card, moving it to the QA column, assigning Elvis, and syncing qa-mirror. Auto-detects per-repo conventions (integration branch, qa-mirror presence, Supabase migrations). Use after a PR is approved (or pushed direct) and ready for QA testing.
Use when turning a new role, JD, hiring-manager call, transcript, or role-context dump into a recruiter pack for sourcing, LinkedIn/profile scraping, screening, and Vetted audition design.
Use when turning a client role, JD, kickoff call, hiring-manager intake, or recruitment search into a complete role-delivery pack. Applies to VFA/VettedAI/partner hiring work, including role calibration, internal role briefs, candidate-facing JDs, outreach emails, work-sample auditions, scoring rubrics, shortlist workflows, and live working docs.
Sweeps a board's "QA Failed" column, and for each card classifies WHY it failed, verifies that classification against ground truth (git ancestry, deployed-vs-prod, DB state, project rules), then routes it to the right remedy. Most QA-Failed cards are NOT "the code is wrong, re-review it" — they're stale checkouts, environment drift, deploy gaps, or rule-misreads. Use when a batch of cards is stuck in QA Failed and you want to clear them efficiently as the senior engineer.
Optimized for Human+AI Agent workflows. Converts high-level product intent into technical tickets that include file anchors, logic constraints, and verification protocols for coding agents.
Cross-repo engineering productivity analysis with bounty estimation. Use when the user wants contributor stats, PR velocity, workload distribution, team performance snapshots, or bounty payout projections.
| name | api-parity-auditor |
| description | Compares API endpoints between any two repositories by auto-discovering their frameworks (Express, Supabase, etc.) and identifying missing or changed routes. |
You are a Senior Systems Integration Engineer. Your goal is to ensure that a migrated or refactored backend (Target) has parity with the original backend (Source). You achieve this by auto-discovering the API structure of each repo and generating a "Parity Manifest".
Analyze both Source and Target repositories to identify the backend framework.
express in package.json, app.get/post in .js/.ts files, or a routes/ directory.supabase/functions directory or supabase in package.json.main.py, requirements.txt, or @app.route.go.mod and mux, gin, or fiber.Use the api_scanner.py script to extract endpoints from both repositories.
Command:
python3 .agent/skills/api-parity-auditor/scripts/api_scanner.py --source /path/to/source --target /path/to/target
The script will output a comparison. Your job is to format this into a "Parity Manifest" artifact.
# API Parity Manifest: [Source] -> [Target]
**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
## 1. Discovered Frameworks
- **Source**: [e.g., Express.js]
- **Target**: [e.g., Supabase Edge Functions]
## 2. Endpoint Parity Table
| Method | Endpoint | Status | Notes |
|--------|----------|--------|-------|
| GET | `/api/users` | ✅ Synced | |
| POST | `/api/login` | ❌ Missing | Not found in Target |
| PUT | `/api/profile`| ⚠️ Changed | Target uses `/api/update-profile` |
## 3. High-Priority Deficits
List endpoints that MUST be migrated immediately to avoid breaking the frontend.
## 4. Recommendations
- [e.g., Unified naming convention for Edge Functions]
- [e.g., Consolidated Auth middleware]
api_scanner.py tool and synthesize the results.