Skip to main content

qc

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

Quellinformationen

Repository
macro-inc/macro
Letzte Quellaktivität
27. Mai 2026 um 19:58
Erkannte Sprache von SKILL.md
Englisch
Sterne
4.713
Forks
460

Installationsoptionen

Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.

Quelldateien prüfen

Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.

SKILL.md wird angezeigt

SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
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.
Auf GitHub ansehen