quality-gate
Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Internal consultant-level QA that validates each phase's analytical direction, premise correctness, and logical soundness. NOT schema validation (scripts do that). Challenges whether the thinking is right.
42 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jodyjdc/ultimate-best-seller-studiotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- unlockers-ai/unlockers-skills-librarytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- TerryFYL/ai-research-armytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Romandredan/1c-quality-gatetheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- shimo4228/zenn-contenttheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- matheuskotayko/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use deploy.
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.
VercelSkilldeploy
Deploy applications to Vercel. Use when the user says "deploy", "deploy to Vercel", "push to production", "deploy my app", or "go live".
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions42 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 42
- RapierCraftStudios/ForgeDock★ 119same name
- microsoft/webui★ 100same name
- impecablemee/gtm-mcp★ 66same name
- microsoft/devsquad-copilot★ 50same name
- Romandredan/1c-quality-gate★ 49same name
- TerryFYL/ai-research-army★ 9same name
- Felpix-Studios/social-science-research★ 8same name
- BerryKuipers/claude-code-toolkit★ 7same name
- freskhu/genesis★ 5same name
- unlockers-ai/unlockers-skills-library★ 4same name
32 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.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- jp-client-defenderSkill
- file-preprocessingSkill
- deliverable-analysisSkill
- gap-analysisSkill
- decision-analysisSkill
- jp-client-critiqueSkill
- persuasion-scenariosSkill
- consulting-qaSkill
- html-report-generationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 34 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 25
After every analytical phase (NOT preprocessor or report generator):
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 34 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
Quality Gate Skill
{WORKSPACE}= timestamped run directory provided by the orchestrator.
Purpose
Catch flawed premises and wrong analytical directions EARLY, before they cascade through the pipeline. A critic that targets the wrong weakness wastes the entire strategist phase. A gap analyzer that flags non-issues adds noise.
Two Layers of Validation
| Layer | What | How | When |
| Schema Validation | JSON structure, field types, ID patterns | Scripts (run by orchestrator) | Before quality gate |
| Consultant QA | Premise, logic, direction, consistency | This agent (opus) | After schema passes |
The orchestrator runs schema validation first (simple file existence + JSON parse check). Only if that passes does the quality gate agent run.
When to Run
After every analytical phase (NOT preprocessor or report generator):
- Phase 1A (Analyst) → premise + extraction quality
- Phase 1B (Gap Analyzer) → gap validity + severity calibration
- Phase 1C (Decision Advisor) → recommendation soundness + completeness
- Phase 2 (Critic) → criticism direction + gap/undecided integration
- Phase 3 (Strategist) → defense direction + cultural calibration
Retry Logic
Phase N → Schema check (script) → Quality Gate (opus)
├─ PASS → proceed to Phase N+1
└─ REVISE → re-run Phase N with fix_direction from QA
├─ 2nd PASS → proceed
└─ 2nd REVISE → proceed with warningsCritical Rule
The quality gate MUST read the original preprocessed deliverable (00_preprocessed_input.md) alongside the phase output. This is how it verifies that claims about the deliverable are actually accurate — not just internally consistent but factually correct.
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.

