Skip to main content

qc

Quality gate. 5 parallel agents review changes. All must pass.

Source facts

Repository
macro-inc/macro
Last source activity
May 27, 2026 at 19:58
Detected SKILL.md language
English
Stars
4,713
Forks
460

Install options

The review-first prompt is selected by default. You can switch to a direct command or download a local copy.

Review the source files

Read SKILL.md and any companion files shown by SkillsMP before deciding whether to install.

Showing SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Source instructions · Read-only preview
name
qc
description
Quality gate. 5 parallel agents review changes. All must pass.
allowed-tools
Task, Bash, Read, Grep, Glob
# QC Gate ## Setup ```bash DIFF=$(git diff main) FILES=$(git diff main --name-only) TASK="{task description or 'general changes'}" ``` Read 1-2 unmodified files from same directories for pattern context. ## Agents Spawn all 5 in parallel. All output raw JSON only, no markdown. ### 1: Code Review (sonnet) ``` DIFF: ${DIFF} - Descriptive naming? - Errors caught with useful messages? - No hardcoded values, commented code, debug statements? - No TODO without ticket ref? - No obvious bugs? - No useless comments? {"pass": bool, "issues": [...]} ``` ### 2: Simplification (sonnet) ``` DIFF: ${DIFF} - Is this overcomplicated? Can I solve the same problem in a simpler manner? - Can I reduce indirection? - Can I reduce surface area? - Premature abstraction? Premature Optimization? YAGNI violations? - Dead code? - Three similar lines > one abstraction {"pass": bool, "issues": [...]} ``` ### 3: Consistency (sonnet) ``` DIFF: ${DIFF} PATTERNS: ${PATTERN_FILES} - Matches existing codebase patterns? - Proper types, no any, no unsafe casts? - Idiomatic error handling? - Changes internally consistent? - Is logic isolated and composable? - Are there existing tests if neccesary? {"pass": bool, "issues": [...]} ``` ### 4: Robustness (sonnet) ``` TASK: ${TASK} DIFF: ${DIFF} - Actually solves the problem? - Edge cases: empty, null, zero, negative, boundaries, concurrency? - Regression risk: changed signatures, shared state, removed exports? - Maintains API contracts? {"pass": bool, "issues": [...]} ``` ### 5: Scope (haiku) ``` TASK: ${TASK} FILES: ${FILES} DIFF: ${DIFF} - Solved the problem or just the symptom? - Changes unrelated to task? - Unnecessary refactoring? {"pass": bool, "issues": [...]} ``` ## Results | Check | Verdict | Issues | |-------|---------|--------| | Code Review | ✓/✗ | ... | | Simplification | ✓/✗ | ... | | Consistency | ✓/✗ | ... | | Robustness | ✓/✗ | ... | | Scope | ✓/✗ | ... | **ALL PASS:** Ready to commit. **ANY FAIL:** List issues, fix them, run `/qc` again. **Same issue 3x:** Escalate to user. ## Notes - Invalid JSON? Retry once. Still broken? Mark fail. - Large diffs (>500 lines): run simplification file-by-file.
View on GitHub