agentleFS
Sign inStart free
ZaxbyHubZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm/.agents/skills/tech-debt-ci-review/SKILL.md

tech-debt-ci-review

Skill517 starsChanged 3 days agoMITView on GitHub

Codex adapter for deep technical-debt and CI-stability audits. Use when asked to find test theater, flaky tests, missing or mis-scoped tests, brittle CI/toolchain behavior, structural debt blocking green PRs, or a remediation order for opencode-swarm.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Read .claude/skills/tech-debt-ci-review/SKILL.md for the canonical audit structure.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Start from actual CI/workflow files, test scripts, recent failures, and current repo state.

    line 14
  3. Very specific:

    Use shell commands and rg to gather evidence.

    line 15

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Tech Debt CI Review

Read .claude/skills/tech-debt-ci-review/SKILL.md for the canonical audit structure.

Codex-specific execution notes:

  • Start from actual CI/workflow files, test scripts, recent failures, and current repo state.
  • Use shell commands and rg to gather evidence; avoid broad test_runner scopes.
  • Prioritize findings that can cause false green, false red, flaky CI, or blocked release flow.
  • Produce findings with file/line references, impact, evidence, and a remediation order.

Load $running-tests for validation command selection and $engineering-conventions when findings touch repo invariants.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free