runtime-validation
Skill6 starsChanged 51 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when you need to prove a change actually works through its real interfaces — during REVIEW or on requests like validate the feature, does it work, run e2e, or smoke test — covering browser E2E, API smoke, CLI checks, and a11y, perf (Lighthouse), and visual-regression audits with graceful tool-degradation
- Deletes or force-pushes
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/github-copilot-modernizationtheir own version, first seen Sep 22, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- microsoft/github-copilot-modernization★ 48same 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.
In this repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-safety-reviewSkill
- agent-team-executionSkill
- agent-team-reviewSkill
- alert-hygieneSkill
- authorial-judgmentSkill
- batch-scriptingSkill
- capture-knowledgeSkill
- deploy-gateSkill
- design-debateSkill
- implementation-drift-checkSkill
- improvement-minerSkill
- incident-analysisSkill
- incident-trend-analyzerSkill
- openspec-shipSkill
- outcome-reviewSkill
- panelSkill
- product-discoverySkill
- project-verificationSkill
- prototype-labSkill
- second-opinionSkill
- security-scannerSkill
- skill-scaffoldSkill
- supply-chain-investigationSkill
- synthesizeSkill
- unified-context-stackSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
16 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 28
Run capability detection via Bash to determine what's available.
- Distinctive: line 108
Check for committed eval packs:
- Very specific: line 114
If eval packs exist, read them and filter scenarios by path field to match detected execution paths (browser, api, cli).
- Distinctive: line 120
If no eval packs or for additional coverage, derive scenarios from:
- Distinctive: line 129
If neither eval packs nor Intent Truth are available, generate generic smoke checks per detected path:
- Distinctive: line 184
Check for AA contrast, ARIA landmarks, keyboard navigation, form labels, and alt text.
- Very specific: line 190
Read references/perf-overlay.md and run its script: it re-probes the dev-server port to set PERF_URL, self-gates on an installed lighthouse …
- Very specific: line 205
Read references/visual-regression-overlay.md and run its script: it routes Playwright's snapshots to the persistent …
- Distinctive: line 271
When no interactive validation tools are detected across all paths, produce a manual validation checklist instead:
- Very specific: line 294
If validation failures are found during REVIEW, fix and re-validate.
- Distinctive: line 299
If new failures emerge, return to step 1
- Distinctive: line 300
After 3 iterations, stop the auto-fix loop and hand off each remaining failure as an explicit action — name the scenario, the observed …
- Distinctive: line 311
After the loop completes (or on first pass if all scenarios pass), present the final Validation Report.
- Distinctive: line 315
After all validation is complete:
- Distinctive: line 334
Run eval packs through this skill (Step 2 derives scenarios from specs and evals.
- Distinctive: line 338
Before claiming the change works, confirm -- from observed output, not inference:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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.
Files
Runtime Validation
Realistic-context validation orchestrator: detect available tools, derive scenarios from specs and eval packs, execute browser/API/CLI paths, report with evidence. Composes with webapp-testing when available.
When to Use
During REVIEW phase, after code changes are complete. Also invocable on explicit validation requests (e.g., "validate the feature", "does it work", "try it out", "run e2e", "smoke test").
This skill proves the feature works in a realistic context — beyond "tests pass" to "the feature behaves correctly when exercised through its real interfaces."
Reference files
Situational detail lives in references/ in this skill's base directory. Read each file with the Read tool at the moment named; never run those scripts or write the report from memory.
| File | Read it |
references/perf-overlay.md | Step 3, before running the Lighthouse perf overlay (a Lighthouse CLI was detected and a dev-server URL found) |
references/visual-regression-overlay.md | Step 3, before running the visual-regression overlay (Playwright is available) |
references/report-template.md | Step 4, before writing the ## Validation Report (every run) |
Step 1: Detect Available Tools
Run capability detection via Bash to determine what's available. Each path is independent — detect all three, then execute whichever paths have tools.
Browser Path
# Playwright (preferred)
command -v npx && npx playwright --version 2>/dev/null && echo "playwright: available" || echo "playwright: not installed"
# Cypress (fallback)
if [ -f package.json ]; then
jq -e '.dependencies.cypress // .devDependencies.cypress' package.json >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "cypress: available" || echo "cypress: not detected"
fi
# axe-core (a11y overlay)
command -v axe && echo "axe: available" || {
if [ -f package.json ]; then
jq -e '.dependencies["@axe-core/cli"] // .devDependencies["@axe-core/cli"]' package.json >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "axe: available via npx" || echo "axe: not detected"
else
echo "axe: not detected"
fi
}
# Lighthouse (perf overlay) — self-gating: only runs if already present.
# Detect ONLY the `lighthouse` CLI (what the overlay actually invokes) so detection
# matches execution. @lhci/cli and unlighthouse have different invocations and are
# NOT run by this overlay — reporting them "available" would announce-then-skip.
command -v lighthouse >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "lighthouse: available" || {
if [ -f package.json ]; then
jq -e '.dependencies.lighthouse // .devDependencies.lighthouse' package.json >/dev/null 2>&1 \
&& echo "lighthouse: available via npx" || echo "lighthouse: not detected"
else
echo "lighthouse: not detected"
fi
}
# webapp-testing companion skill — check cached skill registry (NOT session flags)
jq -r '.skills[] | select(.name == "webapp-testing" and .available == true) | .name' ~/.claude/.skill-registry-cache.json 2>/dev/null && echo "webapp-testing: available" || echo "webapp-testing: not available"API Path
# curl availability
command -v curl && echo "curl: available" || echo "curl: not installed"
# Probe common dev server ports
for port in 3000 5173 8000 8080; do
code=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" --connect-timeout 2 "http://localhost:${port}/" 2>/dev/null)
[ "$code" != "000" ] && echo "server: localhost:${port} (HTTP ${code})"
done
# OpenAPI spec files
for f in openapi.yaml openapi.json swagger.json swagger.yaml; do
[ -f "$f" ] && echo "openapi: ${f}"
doneCLI Path
# Check for built binary
for dir in ./dist ./build ./target ./bin; do
[ -d "$dir" ] && find "$dir" -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm +111 2>/dev/null | head -5
done
# Check package.json bin field
if [ -f package.json ]; then
jq -r '.bin // empty | if type == "string" then . else keys[] end' package.json 2>/dev/null
fi
# Check Makefile targets
[ -f Makefile ] && make -qp 2>/dev/null | awk -F: '/^[a-zA-Z0-9][^$#\/\t=]*:([^=]|$)/ {split($1,a," ");print a[1]}' | head -10Step 2: Derive Validation Scenarios
Three-tier scenario sourcing (highest fidelity first):
Tier 1: Eval Packs
Check for committed eval packs:
ls tests/fixtures/evals/*.json 2>/dev/nullIf eval packs exist, read them and filter scenarios by path field to match detected execution paths (browser, api, cli). Each scenario provides structured inputs and expected outputs.
Eval-pack safety scenarios are append-only — never delete a scenario to make the bar pass. If a case is genuinely obsolete, mark it deprecated with a dated rationale instead. Production failures and edge cases become new scenarios; the set grows over the life of the work.
Tier 2: Intent Truth
If no eval packs or for additional coverage, derive scenarios from:
- OpenSpec specs (
openspec/changes/<feature>/specs/,openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md) — acceptance scenarios - Plan artifacts (
docs/plans/*-plan.md,docs/plans/*-design.md) — task descriptions with implicit validation criteria - Legacy specs (
docs/superpowers/specs/*-design.md) — if canonical paths empty
Extract acceptance criteria and transform them into executable scenarios with inputs and expected outcomes.
Tier 3: Generic Smoke Tests
If neither eval packs nor Intent Truth are available, generate generic smoke checks per detected path:
- Browser: homepage loads (HTTP 200), no console errors, basic a11y pass (axe AA)
- API: health endpoint returns 200, documented endpoints respond with expected status codes
- CLI:
--helpexits 0, basic command produces non-empty output with expected shape
Expectation Provenance (MUST)
Every scenario's expected outcome MUST trace to one of the three source tiers above — eval-pack, intent-truth, or generic-smoke (the only values the report's Source column permits). The implementation under validation (diff, source code) MAY inform which paths to exercise and supplies actual observations — it MUST NOT define what counts as correct. Deriving "expected" from the code you are validating turns validation into confirmation of the implementation, bugs included.
If the only statement of expected behavior is the implementation itself, the scenario is at best generic-smoke — or a Coverage Gap flagged for human definition of expected behavior. A scenario whose expectation cannot be traced to a source tier is invalid: do not report it as PASS.
Mandatory: Safety-Relevant Paths
When the change touches authentication/authorization, data deletion, money/payments, or destructive or externally-visible side effects, those paths MUST be exercised and reported (pass/fail with evidence) — not deferred to "Manual Checks". Green tests on the happy path do not clear a change that alters a safety-relevant path without exercising it. If no tool can exercise such a path, say so explicitly in Coverage Gaps and flag it for human verification rather than omitting it.
Step 3: Execute Per-Path
Execute each detected path independently. Ad-hoc scripts go to mktemp -d (never the repo working tree). Screenshots and artifacts go to tests/artifacts/validation/ (gitignored).
# Create artifact directory
mkdir -p tests/artifacts/validation/
# Create temp directory for ad-hoc scripts
VALIDATION_TMPDIR=$(mktemp -d)Browser Path
When webapp-testing companion is available: Delegate browser scenarios via Skill(webapp-testing). Pass derived scenarios as context. The companion handles Playwright orchestration, screenshot capture, and browser lifecycle.
When Playwright is available directly (no webapp-testing):
# Run existing Playwright tests if present
npx playwright test --reporter=json 2>/dev/null | jq '{passed: .stats.expected, failed: .stats.unexpected, flaky: .stats.flaky}'
# For ad-hoc scenarios (derived from eval packs or specs), generate ephemeral test scripts:
cat > "${VALIDATION_TMPDIR}/smoke.spec.ts" << 'EOTEST'
import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test';
// ... generated scenario code ...
EOTEST
npx playwright test "${VALIDATION_TMPDIR}/smoke.spec.ts" --reporter=jsonaxe-core a11y overlay (runs alongside browser path when axe is detected):
# Via Playwright axe integration
npx @axe-core/cli http://localhost:${PORT}/ --exit --reporter json 2>/dev/null | jq '{violations: [.violations[] | {id, impact, description, nodes: [.nodes[] | .target]}]}'
# Capture screenshots with a11y annotations
npx playwright screenshot --full-page "http://localhost:${PORT}/" "tests/artifacts/validation/a11y-screenshot.png" 2>/dev/nullCheck for AA contrast, ARIA landmarks, keyboard navigation, form labels, and alt text.
Lighthouse perf overlay (runs alongside the browser path when a Lighthouse-family tool was detected AND the port probe found a dev-server URL). Report-only: perf findings are advisory and do NOT enter the fix-rescan loop.
Read references/perf-overlay.md and run its script: it re-probes the dev-server port to set PERF_URL, self-gates on an installed lighthouse (never an npx download), and writes tests/artifacts/validation/lighthouse.json.
These are Lighthouse lab metrics from a single run, not field Core Web Vitals. The three field CWV are LCP, INP, and CLS; a lab run cannot measure INP, so TBT is reported as its lab proxy. The report MUST state that field INP is not measured and that only one dev-server URL was sampled (not the production bundle / field data).
Visual-regression overlay (runs alongside the browser path when Playwright is available). Report-only: visual diffs are advisory and do NOT enter the fix-rescan loop and never hard-block REVIEW — same rationale as the Lighthouse overlay (screenshots are environment-sensitive).
Uses Playwright's built-in screenshot comparison (toHaveScreenshot) — no extra dependency.
Baselines are gitignored artifacts under tests/artifacts/validation/, never committed.
Read references/visual-regression-overlay.md and run its script: it routes Playwright's snapshots to the persistent tests/artifacts/validation/visual-baselines/, seeds a missing baseline, and otherwise reports MATCH or CHANGED.
A first run with no baseline reports BASELINE_MISSING/SEEDED and lists the scenario in
Coverage Gaps — it is not a PASS or FAIL. Subsequent runs report MATCH or CHANGED.
This is session-scoped diffing (detects change within a review session); it is not
cross-commit field regression. For durable cross-commit regression, direct the user to
project-native committed Playwright snapshots in their own suite.
API Path
# Health probe
curl -sf "http://localhost:${PORT}/health" && echo "health: pass" || echo "health: fail"
# Endpoint smoke tests from derived scenarios
for scenario in "${SCENARIOS[@]}"; do
endpoint=$(echo "$scenario" | jq -r '.inputs.endpoint')
expected_status=$(echo "$scenario" | jq -r '.expected.status')
actual_status=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" "http://localhost:${PORT}${endpoint}")
echo "${endpoint}: expected=${expected_status} actual=${actual_status}"
done
# If OpenAPI spec available, validate response bodies against schema
# Use jq to compare response shape against documented schemaCLI Path
# --help smoke
./${BINARY} --help >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "help: pass (exit 0)" || echo "help: fail (exit $?)"
# Scenario execution from eval packs.
# SECURITY: scenario commands are run as code. Treat eval packs as TRUSTED committed fixtures
# only — never execute scenario commands sourced from untrusted/attacker-influenced input.
# Do NOT `eval` the command string (eval runs in THIS shell and re-parses, so a crafted
# fixture could mutate the validation environment). Prefer the structured argv form, which
# runs with NO shell; fall back to a child subshell (bash -c) for the legacy string form.
for scenario in "${CLI_SCENARIOS[@]}"; do
expected=$(echo "$scenario" | jq -r '.expected.exit_code // 0')
if echo "$scenario" | jq -e '.inputs.argv | type == "array"' >/dev/null 2>&1; then
# Preferred: argv array executed directly — no shell, no injection surface.
argv=(); while IFS= read -r _a; do argv+=("$_a"); done < <(echo "$scenario" | jq -r '.inputs.argv[]')
"${argv[@]}" >/dev/null 2>&1; actual=$?
label="${argv[*]}"
else
# Legacy string form (trusted fixtures only): run in a child subshell, never `eval`.
cmd=$(echo "$scenario" | jq -r '.inputs.command')
bash -c "${cmd}" >/dev/null 2>&1; actual=$?
label="${cmd}"
fi
echo "${label}: expected_exit=${expected} actual_exit=${actual}"
doneGraceful Degradation
Each path degrades independently through four tiers:
| Tier | Condition | Behavior |
| 1 | Tool available + specs/evals exist | Derive and run structured scenarios with full evidence |
| 2 | Tool available + no specs/evals | Run generic smoke checks (Tier 3 scenarios from Step 2) |
| 3 | No tool detected for a path | Emit manual validation checklist with specific steps for that path |
| 4 | No tools at all | Report "no interactive validation tools available" and emit a manual checklist fallback |
When no interactive validation tools are detected across all paths, produce a manual validation checklist instead:
### Manual Validation Checklist
No interactive validation tools detected. Verify manually:
- [ ] Open the application and confirm the changed feature works
- [ ] Check browser console for errors
- [ ] Verify API responses match expected schemas
- [ ] Test CLI commands produce expected output
- [ ] Check accessibility with browser dev tools
- [ ] Run `npx lighthouse <url>` manually and review the performance score + LCP/CLS/TBTStep 4: Unified Report
Present results with the heading ## Validation Report. Same shape regardless of which paths executed — omit sections for paths that were not detected but always include Coverage Gaps and Manual Checks.
Read references/report-template.md before writing the report: it holds the exact table for each path (Browser, API, CLI, A11y, Perf, Visual Regression) and the Coverage Gaps and Manual Checks sections. Write each Coverage Gap as a next action and each Manual Check as an imperative the human can execute, never as a passive note.
Source column values: eval-pack (from tests/fixtures/evals/*.json), intent-truth (from specs/plans), generic-smoke (auto-generated). A row whose Source is not one of these three values had its expectation derived from somewhere else — usually the implementation — and must be re-derived from a valid source tier or dropped (see Expectation Provenance).
Step 5: Fix-Rescan Loop
If validation failures are found during REVIEW, fix and re-validate. Max 3 iterations to prevent infinite loops (same pattern as security-scanner):
- Present failing scenarios from the Validation Report
- Fix the underlying issue using normal editing tools
- Re-run only the specific failing scenarios to verify the fix
- If new failures emerge, return to step 1
- After 3 iterations, stop the auto-fix loop and hand off each remaining failure as an explicit action — name the scenario, the observed failure, and the specific fix or decision the human must make. Do not file it as a passive "needs review."
Fix priority: Functional failures (wrong output, crashes) > A11y violations (serious > moderate) > Warnings
Perf is report-only. Lighthouse scores are noisy and not rescannable like discrete
defects, so perf findings do NOT enter this fix-rescan loop and never hard-block REVIEW —
they are reported with a remediation hint only. When render-blocking CSS is the flagged
cause AND the project has no framework-level critical-CSS inlining, the hint MAY name a
critical-CSS tool (critical or the maintained beasties fork of critters); for
framework apps (Next/Nuxt/SSR) defer to the framework's own inlining.
After the loop completes (or on first pass if all scenarios pass), present the final Validation Report.
Cleanup
After all validation is complete:
# Clean up ad-hoc scripts (temp directory)
rm -rf "${VALIDATION_TMPDIR}"
# Artifacts in tests/artifacts/validation/ are preserved (gitignored) for human reviewAd-hoc test scripts are ephemeral and never committed. Screenshots and validation artifacts persist in tests/artifacts/validation/ for post-review inspection but are gitignored.
Eval strategy at DESIGN
The DESIGN-phase hint EVAL STRATEGY points here. Before leaving DESIGN, classify how the feature is verified; ask the user if it is unclear.
- Probabilistic, AI, LLM or agent behaviour (outputs cannot be exact-matched): plan an eval SET, not just unit tests. It holds a smoke subset; adversarial and safety subsets (jailbreak, injection, safety-routing suppression); a pinned judge model and version; never-delete cases (deprecate with a dated rationale instead); and a pre-registered safety stop naming the halt condition and who can call it. Author the safety subset first and have it failing (red) before implementation.
- Deterministic behaviour: standard test-driven development plus the design's acceptance scenarios are the bar.
- Safety dimensions are hard pass/fail gates, never averaged into a quality blend.
Run eval packs through this skill (Step 2 derives scenarios from specs and evals; Step 3 executes them).
Verification
Before claiming the change works, confirm -- from observed output, not inference:
- Each declared path (browser / API / CLI) either ran with its result captured in
tests/artifacts/validation/, or was explicitly reported as skipped with the missing tool named -- announce-then-skip is a failure. - Safety-relevant paths were exercised, not deferred.
- A passing run shows real interface output (HTTP status, exit code, screenshot) -- not a stubbed or assumed success.
- Lab-only signals (e.g. Lighthouse perf) are reported as lab, never field, and never gate the result.
- Visual-regression results (if run) are reported as MATCH / CHANGED / BASELINE_MISSING and never hard-block the review -- first-run baselines are seeded, not failed; durable cross-commit regression is delegated to the consumer's committed snapshot suite.
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.

