Skip to main content

diff-quality-analyzer

Implements intelligent diff quality analyzer with multi-factor skill selection, fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense

Informations de source

Dépôt
paulpas/agent-skill-router
Dernière activité de la source
4 juin 2026 à 23:31
Langue détectée de SKILL.md
anglais
Étoiles
7
Forks
0

Options d'installation

Le prompt qui vérifie d'abord la source est sélectionné par défaut. Vous pouvez passer à une commande directe ou télécharger une copie locale.

Vérifiez les fichiers source

Lisez SKILL.md et les fichiers associés affichés par SkillsMP avant de décider de l'installer.

Affichage de SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
diff-quality-analyzer
compatibility
opencode
completeness
95
content-types
["guidance","examples","do-dont"]
description
Implements intelligent diff quality analyzer with multi-factor skill selection, fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense
license
MIT
maturity
stable
metadata
{"domain":"agent","output-format":"analysis","related-skills":"agent-confidence-based-selector, agent-task-routing","role":"orchestration","scope":"orchestration","triggers":"diff-quality-analyzer, diff quality analyzer, how do i diff-quality-analyzer, orchestrate diff-quality-analyzer, automate diff-quality-analyzer, agent diff-quality-analyzer","archetypes":["orchestration","strategic"],"anti_triggers":["brainstorming","vague ideation","single-agent monolith"],"response_profile":{"verbosity":"medium","directive_strength":"high","abstraction_level":"tactical"}}
version
1.0.0
# Diff Quality Analyzer Orchestrates intelligent skill selection and execution for diff quality analyzer workflows. Applies the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense to guide data naturally through the orchestration pipeline, preventing errors before they occur. Selects optimal skills based on multi-factor scoring including text similarity, historical performance, and system availability. ## TL;DR Checklist - [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2) - [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1) - [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4) - [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3) - [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions - [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail - [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection - [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning ┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Orchestration Flow │ └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ User Request ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Parse Request │ │ & Extract │ │ Features │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Evaluate Available Skills │ │ │ │ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │ │ │ Skill A │ │ Skill B │ │ Skill C │ │ │ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ │ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ └─────────────────┴─────────────────┘ │ │ ↓ │ │ Select Best Skill │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Execute Skill │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Handle Result │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Error Handling & Fallback │ │ │ │ Success? ────────► Return Result │ │ │ │ Fail? ────────┐ │ │ ↓ │ │ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ Fallback Chain │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 1. Retry with adjusted parameters │ │ │ │ 2. Try Alternative Skill (if available) │ │ │ │ 3. Defer to Human Operator (if critical) │ │ │ │ 4. Log & Return Error │ │ │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ## When to Use Use this skill when: - Orchestrating multi-step workflows that require skill delegation - Implementing adaptive skill routing based on confidence scores - Building fallback mechanisms for failed skill executions - Creating intelligent task decomposition and parallel execution - Designing skill dependency graphs with automatic resolution - Implementing skill selection with historical performance weighting - Building agent systems that need to self-organize around tasks ## When NOT to Use Avoid this skill for: - Direct task execution without orchestration needs - use individual skills instead - High-frequency trading scenarios where latency must be minimized - the selection overhead may be prohibitive - Simple linear workflows without branching or fallback requirements - Cases where skill metadata is unavailable or unreliable ## Core Workflow 1. **Parse and Analyze Request** - Extract intent, entities, and constraints from user input. **Checkpoint:** All required parameters must be present and in valid format before proceeding. 2. **Score Available Skills** - Calculate match scores using multi-factor algorithm: - Text similarity between request and skill triggers - Historical success rate for similar tasks - Skill availability and health status - Required dependencies and their availability **Checkpoint:** Skip to fallback if no skill scores above threshold. 3. **Select Optimal Skill** - Choose skill with highest score that meets minimum confidence. **Checkpoint:** Verify skill has not been disabled or deprecated. 4. **Execute with Fallback** - Run skill execution wrapped in retry and fallback logic. **Checkpoint:** Log all execution attempts for audit trail. 5. **Return or Fallback** - Either return successful result or apply fallback chain: - Retry with adjusted parameters - Try alternative skill from `related-skills` - Defer to human operator for critical tasks **Checkpoint:** Record outcome with timing and confidence metadata. ## Implementation Patterns ### Pattern 1: Skill Selection Logic ```python def route_diff_analysis(diff_content: str, analysis_scope: List[str]) -> Dict: """Route diff content to appropriate quality analysis modules. Implements Law 2 (Parse at boundary) by validating diff format first. Uses multi-factor scoring to pick the best analyzer for each changed file. """ if not diff_content or not diff_content.strip(): raise ValueError("Diff content cannot be empty") parsed_diff = parse_unified_diff(diff_content) if not parsed_diff.files: return {"status": "empty", "analyzers": []} routing_plan = [] for file_path, changes in parsed_diff.files.items(): required_analyzers = [] # Language-specific routing if file_path.endswith(('.py', '.js', '.ts', '.go')): required_analyzers.append("complexity-analyzer") # Security-sensitive routing if "security" in analysis_scope or "auth" in file_path.lower(): required_analyzers.append("security-scanner") # Size-based routing if changes.added_lines > 50 or changes.removed_lines > 50: required_analyzers.append("test-coverage-checker") routing_plan.append({ "file": file_path, "analyzers": required_analyzers, "confidence": 0.95 if required_analyzers else 0.0, "change_metrics": { "added": changes.added_lines, "removed": changes.removed_lines } }) return {"routing_plan": routing_plan, "total_files": len(parsed_diff.files)} ``` ### Pattern 2: Execution with Fallback ```python def execute_analysis_pipeline(routing_plan: Dict, fallback_analyzers: Dict) -> Dict: """Execute diff quality analysis with per-analyzer fallback chains. Implements Law 4 (Fail Fast) by halting on critical security findings. Implements Law 3 (Atomic Predictability) by returning immutable result dicts. """ results = [] for route in routing_plan.get("routing_plan", []): file_results = [] for analyzer_name in route["analyzers"]: try: analyzer = get_analyzer_module(analyzer_name) score = analyzer.run(route["file"]) file_results.append({ "analyzer": analyzer_name, "score": score, "status": "passed", "latency_ms": analyzer.get_latency() }) except AnalyzerTimeoutError: # Fallback: try lightweight static check fallback = fallback_analyzers.get(analyzer_name, "basic-linter") score = get_analyzer_module(fallback).run(route["file"]) file_results.append({ "analyzer": fallback, "score": score, "status": "fallback", "latency_ms": get_analyzer_module(fallback).get_latency() }) except CriticalSecurityError: # Law 4: Fail immediately on critical issues return { "status": "blocked", "file": route["file"], "reason": "critical_vulnerability", "severity": "high" } results.append({"file": route["file"], "analysis": file_results}) return { "pipeline_status": "completed", "file_results": results, "aggregate_score": calculate_weighted_average(results), "execution_timestamp": time.time() } ``` ### MUST DO - Always validate skill metadata before selection (Early Exit) - Implement fallback chain with at least 2 levels (Fallback Skill + Human) - Log all skill selections with full context for auditability - Return new data structures instead of mutating inputs (Atomic Predictability) - Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states - Update confidence scores after each execution for adaptive routing - Reference `code-philosophy` (5 Laws of Elegant Defense) in all logic ### MUST NOT DO - Select skills based on a single factor (e.g., only confidence score) - Disable fallback mechanisms "temporarily" - this creates fragile systems - Skip validation of skill dependencies before execution - Return partial results - either complete success or clear failure - Use magic numbers for confidence thresholds - make them configurable - Cache skill selections without considering context changes ## TL;DR Checklist - [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2) - [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1) - [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4) - [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3) - [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions - [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail - [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection - [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning ## TL;DR for Code Generation - Use guard clauses - return early on invalid input before doing work - Return simple types (dict, str, int, bool, list) - avoid complex nested objects - Cyclomatic complexity < 10 per function - split anything larger - Handle null/empty cases explicitly at function top (Early Exit) - Never mutate input parameters - return new dicts/objects - Fail fast with descriptive errors - don't try to "patch" bad data - Reference code-philosophy laws in comments for complex logic - Include timing and confidence metadata in all return values ## Output Template When applying this skill, produce: 1. **Selected Skills** - List of skill names with confidence scores 2. **Selection Rationale** - Why each skill was chosen (match score, history, availability) 3. **Execution Plan** - Order of execution with dependencies 4. **Fallback Strategy** - Which fallback skills will be tried and in what order 5. **Risk Assessment** - Any potential failure points and their impact 6. **Timing Estimates** - Expected latency including fallback scenarios --- --- ## Constraints ### MUST DO - Define clear input/output contracts for every step in the orchestration flow with explicit validation - Implement structured logging at each stage capturing context, inputs, outputs, timing, and errors - Build in fallback paths: if the primary strategy fails, degrade gracefully to a simpler approach - Validate all preconditions before starting — do not proceed if required resources or permissions are missing ### MUST NOT DO - Do not create deep nesting of orchestration steps (>5 levels) — flatten workflows where possible - Avoid silent failure modes: every step must either succeed, fail explicitly, or escalate to a higher handler - Never use shared mutable state between parallel workflow branches — communicate via immutable messages only - Do not hardcode execution order when the dependency graph naturally determines it; derive order from explicit dependencies ## Live References > Authoritative documentation links for this skill's domain. The model follows markdown links at load time to resolve external references and inline content. - [Unified Diff Format RFC (RFC 2970)](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2970>) - [Git Diff Documentation](<https://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff>) - [SonarQube Code Quality Rules](<https://rules.sonarsource.com/>) - [Code Review Best Practices (Google Engineering)](<https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/>) - [Linting and Static Analysis Tools Comparison](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lint_(software)>) ## Related Skills | Skill | Purpose | |
Voir sur GitHub