菜单
Verify completion with evidence using 6-phase gates and three-way audits. Use when claiming task completion, committing code, or validating components. Not for skipping verification or bypassing quality gates.
Create single-file commands with dynamic content injection (@path and !command). Use when building commands that need filesystem access, git state, runtime context, or argument handling with $1 placeholders. Includes @file injection, !shell execution, <injected_content> wrappers, and single-file structure patterns. Not for skills (use skill-development) or audit workflows.
Create and refine single-file commands with @/! injection. Use when authoring new commands or improving existing ones. Includes namespacing rules, thin interface patterns, and delegation best practices. Not for skills or agents.
Master Claude Code's context primitives (Skill, Task, Command) and orchestration patterns. Use when designing agent workflows, understanding why some patterns work while others fail (e.g., Task→Task is forbidden but Skill→Skill is allowed), or implementing Chain of Experts architectures. Not for writing prompts or content generation.
Audit skill files against quality standards. Use ONLY within Manager Pattern workflow via TaskList. Receives taskId, reads draftPath from task metadata, validates against skill-development rules, writes auditResult to task metadata. Not for manual use.
Create portable skills with SKILL.md. Use when building new skills or documenting patterns. Includes frontmatter syntax, quality standards, and primitives. Not for commands or agents.
Creates skills with automatic quality validation. Use when you need a new skill created with all quality gates enforced (frontmatter, navigation, critical_constraint). Uses TaskList for stateful retry loops with skill-auditor. Not for quick prototypes or when manual skill creation is preferred.
| name | quality-standards |
| description | Verify completion with evidence using 6-phase gates and three-way audits. Use when claiming task completion, committing code, or validating components. Not for skipping verification or bypassing quality gates. |
| context | fork |
| agent | Explore |
NO CLAIMS WITHOUT EVIDENCE.
Every assertion requires fresh verification output. Every gate must pass sequentially.
| Instead of... | Use This Evidence... |
|---|---|
| "I fixed the bug" | Test auth_login_test.ts passed (Exit Code 0) |
| "Build should work" | npm run build: SUCCESS |
| "TypeScript is fine" | tsc --noEmit: 0 errors, 0 warnings |
| "Tests pass" | 47 passed, 0 failed |
| "Linting is clean" | ESLint: no errors |
BUILD → TYPE → LINT → TEST → SECURITY → DIFF
Gates pass in sequence. Stop on first failure.
| Phase | Checks | Typical Command |
|---|---|---|
| BUILD | Compilation succeeds | npm run build |
| TYPE | Type safety | tsc --noEmit |
| LINT | Code style | eslint . --max-warnings 0 |
| TEST | Tests pass | npm test |
| SECURITY | No secrets/vulns | npm audit |
| DIFF | Intentional changes | git diff --stat |
Before claiming completion, compare:
| Dimension | Question |
|---|---|
| Request | What did the user explicitly ask for? |
| Delivery | What was actually implemented? |
| Standards | What do quality standards specify? |
| Check | How |
|---|---|
| Structure | Read frontmatter, confirm valid YAML |
| Portability | Zero external .claude/rules references |
| Content | Critical constraint footer present |
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| All gates passed with evidence? | Yes/No |
| Three-way audit complete? | Yes/No |
| Every claim backed by output? | Yes/No |
<critical_constraint> IRON LAW: No claims without evidence. Run commands, capture output, report results.
Gates pass in sequence—stop on first failure. Each claim requires fresh verification output. Compare Request vs Delivery vs Standards in audits. </critical_constraint>
