一键在 Manus 中运行任何 Skill

manual-validation-harness

星标22

分支14

更新时间2026年5月6日 12:15

Use when validating a Coralogix terraform-provider bug fix end-to-end against a real Coralogix environment. Builds the provider locally, runs multi-step Terraform apply/plan scenarios to verify idempotency, and catches perpetual-diff regressions before merge.

安装

用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。

在 Manus 中运行

来源

coralogix

coralogix/terraform-provider-coralogix

打开 GitHub 仓库查看创作者相关仓库

下载

在 Manus 中运行

Manual end-to-end validation

Trigger: user wants to exercise a provider bug fix against a real env, post-build pre-merge.

Procedure:

make install from the PR branch (builds + installs to ~/.terraform.d/plugins/locally/debug/coralogix/1.5/<arch>).
Isolated workdir: mkdir /tmp/<ticket>-test && cd $_.
Project-local terraformrc with dev_overrides for coralogix/coralogix pointing at the install dir above. export TF_CLI_CONFIG_FILE=$PWD/terraformrc.
Multi-step scenarios: keep step files in ./steps/, cp steps/stepN.tf main.tf between runs. (Terraform reads every .tf in cwd → loose step files cause duplicate-resource errors.)
Each step: terraform apply -auto-approve, verify in UI, then terraform plan → expect No changes. (idempotency catches perpetual-diff regressions).
Cleanup: terraform destroy -auto-approve && rm -rf /tmp/<ticket>-test.

Gotchas:

403 from API = key/env mismatch, not a provider bug.
"Provider development overrides are in effect" warning is expected.
Don't write .tf files via heredoc in chat — paste indentation breaks them. Use an editor or have Claude Write them.

Why: unit + acceptance tests catch regressions; manual validation gives the reviewer end-to-end confidence and exposes UI-layer behaviour the test suite can't observe.

同仓库更多 Skills

同仓库

framework-import-dynamic-attributes

coralogix/terraform-provider-coralogix

Use when a Terraform Plugin Framework resource import reads required DynamicAttribute values. Handle imported partial state before converting dynamic values.

2026-05-2622

data-enrichments-scoped-replace

coralogix/terraform-provider-coralogix

Use when changing coralogix_data_enrichments update semantics or drift tests. Prefer state-ID delete plus add over partial atomic overwrite for scoped replaces.

2026-05-1822

create-pr

coralogix/terraform-provider-coralogix

Use when creating a PR for a non-trivial bug fix in this repo. Assembles a structured PR description following .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md with expanded sections for root cause, risks, and test plan. Do NOT use for trivial one-liner fixes.

2026-05-0622

name	manual-validation-harness
description	Use when validating a Coralogix terraform-provider bug fix end-to-end against a real Coralogix environment. Builds the provider locally, runs multi-step Terraform apply/plan scenarios to verify idempotency, and catches perpetual-diff regressions before merge.

Manual end-to-end validation

Trigger: user wants to exercise a provider bug fix against a real env, post-build pre-merge.

Procedure:

make install from the PR branch (builds + installs to ~/.terraform.d/plugins/locally/debug/coralogix/1.5/<arch>).
Isolated workdir: mkdir /tmp/<ticket>-test && cd $_.
Project-local terraformrc with dev_overrides for coralogix/coralogix pointing at the install dir above. export TF_CLI_CONFIG_FILE=$PWD/terraformrc.
Multi-step scenarios: keep step files in ./steps/, cp steps/stepN.tf main.tf between runs. (Terraform reads every .tf in cwd → loose step files cause duplicate-resource errors.)
Each step: terraform apply -auto-approve, verify in UI, then terraform plan → expect No changes. (idempotency catches perpetual-diff regressions).
Cleanup: terraform destroy -auto-approve && rm -rf /tmp/<ticket>-test.

Gotchas:

403 from API = key/env mismatch, not a provider bug.
"Provider development overrides are in effect" warning is expected.
Don't write .tf files via heredoc in chat — paste indentation breaks them. Use an editor or have Claude Write them.

Why: unit + acceptance tests catch regressions; manual validation gives the reviewer end-to-end confidence and exposes UI-layer behaviour the test suite can't observe.