基于 SOC 职业分类
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。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/existential-birds/beagle --skill swift-testing-code-review命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
Use when you need a bite-sized, TDD-driven implementation plan but do NOT have a brainstorm-beagle spec to plan against. quick-plan reconstructs intent from the current conversation, fans out domain-expert exploration subagents across the codebase, and synthesizes the same plan format write-plan produces — without requiring `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`. Triggers on: "quick plan", "plan this out", "plan what we just discussed", "turn this into an implementation plan", "plan this without a spec", "I don't have a spec, just plan it", "write-plan but no spec". Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants an implementation or TDD plan and there is no spec to plan against — even if they just say "plan it" after discussing a feature. Writes to `.beagle/plans/<slug>/plan.md`. If a finalized spec already exists at `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`, prefer write-plan. Does NOT brainstorm specs, write code, or execute the plan — produces the plan document (and an optional handoff prompt) only.
Use when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: "brainstorm this", "I have an idea for...", "help me think through this project", "what should I build", "spec this out". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews — produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
Use as the follow-up to brainstorm-beagle when a spec has an Open Questions section (or quietly carries latent gaps) that need closing before planning or implementation can begin. Triggers on: "resolve the open questions", "close the gaps in this spec", "research the open items", "finalize my spec", "make this spec implementation-ready", "answer the TBDs". Also triggers whenever the user points at a brainstorm-beagle spec and asks for research, proposals, or answers to unresolved items. Orchestrates parallel research subagents when available (falls back to inline sequential research otherwise), proposes answers one at a time for user approval, then rewrites the spec in place so it arrives at planning with no known gaps. Does NOT write code, design implementation, or create plans — it only produces a complete spec.
| name | swift-testing-code-review |
| description | Reviews Swift Testing code for proper use of |
Complete in order before recording Swift Testing review findings. Stack with review-verification-protocol for universal review rules.
.swift paths under review (or a user-named single file). Pass: Paths captured in working notes or one line: No Swift files in scope — then stop with no findings.import Testing or @Test / #expect / #require / @Suite appears in that file (open or search). Pass: At least one match per critiqued file, or you exclude that file from Swift Testing review with a one-line reason (e.g. XCTest-only).[FILE:LINE] evidence. If you report zero issues, state Protocol applied; no Swift Testing issues (or equivalent) in the review summary.| Issue Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| #expect vs #require, expression capture, error testing | references/expect-macro.md |
| @Test with arguments, traits, zip() pitfalls | references/parameterized.md |
| confirmation, async sequences, completion handlers | references/async-testing.md |
| @Suite, tags, parallel execution, .serialized | references/organization.md |
#expect (not pre-computed booleans)#require used only for preconditions, #expect for assertions(any Error).self)zip() (not Cartesian product)confirmation(expectedCount:)withCheckedContinuation, not confirmation.serialized applied only where necessary (shared resources)@Test functions#expect lose diagnostic context?#require stopping tests prematurely instead of revealing all failures?zip() silently drop test cases due to unequal array lengths?confirmation?