agentleFS
dceoydceoy/gha-for-devops/.agents/skills/local-qa/SKILL.md

local-qa

Skill2 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Run repository QA after file changes, automatically diagnose and repair any failed check, and rerun until it passes or a documented blocker remains.

5 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions5 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 5

    1. talayash/agentrium★ 48same name
    2. dceoy/mt5api★ 7same name
    3. dceoy/ai-coding-agent-skills★ 4same name
    4. dceoy/docker-claude-code★ 2same name
    5. dceoy/oracle-pr-loop★ 1same name

    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

4 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    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:

    Run the repository's scripts/qa.sh after changes.

    line 9
  2. Very specific:

    After a repair, run a focused check that reproduces the failed condition, then rerun the entire ./scripts/qa.sh.

    line 20
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep changes relevant to the requested task and QA findings.

    line 26
  4. Distinctive:

    Stop only when a repair is unsafe, requires authorization or unavailable privileges, has no supported fix, is outside authorized scope, or …

    line 29

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.

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

Local QA

Run the repository's scripts/qa.sh after changes. The script defines the required checks; this skill owns diagnosis, remediation, and retries for every failure, regardless of which tool failed. Do not embed scanner-specific repair logic in the script.

Procedure

  1. Record the initial working-tree status and preserve pre-existing changes. Run ./scripts/qa.sh from the repository root, capturing the exit status and relevant output.
  2. On any nonzero exit, identify the failing command, underlying cause, and affected files or dependencies. Use the failure output and targeted inspection; distinguish a reproducible defect from a transient infrastructure failure. Do not stop merely because the failure predates the current changes.
  3. Attempt the smallest evidence-backed, in-scope repair that can address the cause:
    • Formatting, lint, types, tests, builds, or configuration: fix the affected source/configuration and use the repository's supported fixers or test commands.
    • Dependency or security scans: identify affected packages/advisories and available safe versions; update manifests/lockfiles using the declared package manager when compatible, then validate the result. Treat existing and newly introduced findings consistently, but do not broaden unrelated changes without authorization.
    • Missing or broken tooling: restore declared dependencies via the project's package manager or tool manager (for example, mise, uv, or pnpm). Use a system package manager only when permitted; do not require elevated privileges.
    • Network, registry, environment, or external-service errors: investigate and retry a transient operation once when safe, or use a supported equivalent mechanism that preserves the check.
  4. After a repair, run a focused check that reproduces the failed condition, then rerun the entire ./scripts/qa.sh. Address the next failure in the same way, even if it comes from a different tool. Continue until the full QA run succeeds or a stop condition applies.
  5. Limit remediation to 3 materially distinct attempts per root cause and 12 full QA runs per invocation. Count attempts and retain findings across reruns; never loop on an unchanged, reproducible failure. A tool/install failure follows the same recovery process and limits.
  6. Report the final QA status, attempted fixes, files changed, remaining failed command(s), and concrete reason for any blocker. Never claim QA passed unless a full post-repair run exited successfully.

Safety

  • Keep changes relevant to the requested task and QA findings. Preserve unrelated or user-authored work; inspect diffs and revert only this skill's unsuccessful changes, never unrelated edits.
  • Preserve required checks, vulnerability gates, release-age restrictions, and lockfile integrity. Do not hide findings, add ignore/suppression rules, weaken lint/tests, bypass controls, or silently perform breaking/major upgrades to make QA green.
  • For installs and dependency changes, honor the repository's existing supply-chain cooldown. If invoking uv, npm, or pnpm, set the same cooldown environment variables in that command's shell environment as in scripts/qa.sh (UV_EXCLUDE_NEWER='1 day', NPM_CONFIG_MIN_RELEASE_AGE=1, PNPM_CONFIG_MINIMUM_RELEASE_AGE=1440) unless project configuration already enforces them.
  • Stop only when a repair is unsafe, requires authorization or unavailable privileges, has no supported fix, is outside authorized scope, or the retry limits are exhausted. State the blocker explicitly; leave unresolved QA failures failing.

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.