smoke-test
Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Verify the bot still builds after code changes, without needing a real Telegram token or Claude login. Run after any edit to the Python modules, and before committing.
- Reads credentials
21 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- AJschoons/robowrighttheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- blamechris/chroxytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- crbnos/carbontheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- danielvm-git/bigpowerstheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- dspace-group/SystemDeskMCPtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- garrytan/gbraintheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use debugging-difficult-bugs, pr-explainer and 1 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
dzevsSkilldebugging-difficult-bugs
Use early when debugging a medium or hard bug, especially when tests alone may not reveal the real runtime failure. Trigger this before extended TDD iteration when a bug involves runtime state, PTY/terminal ordering, persistence, streaming, async/concurrency, the TUI/manual reproduction, the IPC socket layer, or when a red or newly passing test may not model the real issue. Skip only when the root cause is already directly proven by a stack trace or deterministic test that exercises the real runtime path.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Mathews-TomSkillpr-explainer
Use when a developer asks to explain a pushed PR, walk through a PR stack, understand one stack member, or explain what an AI agent just pushed so they can connect code changes to end-to-end functionality and update domain knowledge. Not for defect review, merge approval, PR-body authoring, or full-repository onboarding.
Also in 3 projects that use this
dzevsSkillpr-splitter
Use when breaking a large, complex, messy, or hard-to-review pull request into multiple smaller PRs; planning stacked PRs; extracting independent changes from a branch; splitting mixed refactor and behavior changes; managing drift after review feedback (operator gate, Codex/swarm second opinion); rebasing follow-up PRs as earlier PRs change; or preserving original branch intent while shipping incrementally.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions21 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 21
- garrytan/gbrain★ 32ksame name
- mastra-ai/mastra★ 29ksame name
- JoshuaC215/agent-service-toolkit★ 4.6ksame name
- crbnos/carbon★ 2.8ksame name
- peteonrails/voxtype★ 1.8ksame name
- nginx/nginx-s3-gateway★ 761same name
- danielvm-git/bigpowers★ 288same name
- andrew-yangy/gru-ai★ 153same name
- stacklok/toolhive-registry-server★ 29same name
- sohei56/maul-team★ 17same name
11 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
No test suite exists yet; this is the fastest correctness gate.
- Very specific: line 30
If imports fail after a dependency upgrade, check docs/wiki/sdk-notes.md / docs/wiki/telegram-notes.md for the versions facts were verified …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Smoke test
No test suite exists yet; this is the fastest correctness gate. Run from the repo root (Bash tool):
python -m py_compile config.py state.py claude_runner.py telegram_bot.py main.py \
&& TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN=dummy ALLOWED_USER_IDS=123 python -c "
import telegram_bot
app = telegram_bot.build_application()
print('BUILD OK — handlers:', len(app.handlers[0]))
"Expected output: BUILD OK — handlers: 9 (update the count here if you add/remove
handlers — this file asserting a stale count is a bug).
What it catches: syntax errors, broken imports (incl. SDK/PTB API drift after upgrades), handler registration mistakes, config-module regressions.
What it does NOT catch: runtime behavior against real Telegram/Claude. For a live
test, the user must run python main.py with a filled-in .env and message the
bot — you cannot do this part; ask them.
If imports fail after a dependency upgrade, check docs/wiki/sdk-notes.md /
docs/wiki/telegram-notes.md for the versions facts were verified against, fix the
code, then update those pages.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

