Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

springboot-verification

Verify Spring Boot changes through builds, static analysis that checks code without running it, tests, coverage checks, and security scans. Review the diff and produce a pass/fail report showing readiness and issues to fix.

OriginalShow the original description

Run the full Spring Boot verification loop — Maven or Gradle build, SpotBugs, PMD, and Checkstyle static analysis, unit and Testcontainers integration tests with JaCoCo coverage, OWASP dependency and secret scans, and diff review — producing a pass/fail readiness report. Use when preparing a Spring Boot pull request, validating coverage thresholds, or running pre-deploy verification.

Works withPostgreSQL
See how to install

Good for

  • Checking a Spring Boot service before opening a pull request
  • Verifying changes after refactoring or dependency upgrades
  • Checking test coverage against the target
  • Running verification before deployment

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Spring Boot Verification Loop

Run before PRs, after major changes, and pre-deploy.

When to Activate

  • Before opening a pull request for a Spring Boot service
  • After major refactoring or dependency upgrades
  • Pre-deployment verification for staging or production
  • Running full build → lint → test → security scan pipeline
  • Validating test coverage meets thresholds

Phase 1: Build

mvn -T 4 clean verify -DskipTests
# or
./gradlew clean assemble -x test

If build fails, stop and fix.

Phase 2: Static Analysis

Maven (common plugins):

mvn -T 4 spotbugs:check pmd:check checkstyle:check

Gradle (if configured):

./gradlew checkstyleMain pmdMain spotbugsMain

Phase 3: Tests + Coverage

mvn -T 4 test
mvn jacoco:report   # verify 80%+ coverage
# or
./gradlew test jacocoTestReport

Report:

  • Total tests, passed/failed
  • Coverage % (lines/branches)

Unit Tests

Test service logic in isolation with mocked dependencies:

@ExtendWith(MockitoExtension.class)
class UserServiceTest {

  @Mock private UserRepository userRepository;
  @InjectMocks private UserService userService;

  @Test
  void createUser_validInput_returnsUser() {
    var dto = new CreateUserDto("Alice", "alice@example.com");
    var expected = new User(1L, "Alice", "alice@example.com");
    when(userRepository.save(any(User.class))).thenReturn(expected);

    var result = userService.create(dto);

    assertThat(result.name()).isEqualTo("Alice");
    verify(userRepository).save(any(User.class));
  }

  @Test
  void createUser_duplicateEmail_throwsException() {
    var dto = new CreateUserDto("Alice", "existing@example.com");
    when(userRepository.existsByEmail(dto.email())).thenReturn(true);

    assertThatThrownBy(() -> userService.create(dto))
        .isInstanceOf(DuplicateEmailException.class);
  }
}

Integration Tests with Testcontainers

Test against a real database instead of H2:

@SpringBootTest
@Testcontainers
class UserRepositoryIntegrationTest {

  @Container
  static PostgreSQLContainer<?> postgres = new PostgreSQLContainer<>("postgres:16-alpine")
      .withDatabaseName("testdb");

  @DynamicPropertySource
  static void configureProperties(DynamicPropertyRegistry registry) {
    registry.add("spring.datasource.url", postgres::getJdbcUrl);
    registry.add("spring.datasource.username", postgres::getUsername);
    registry.add("spring.datasource.password", postgres::getPassword);
  }

  @Autowired private UserRepository userRepository;

  @Test
  void findByEmail_existingUser_returnsUser() {
    userRepository.save(new User("Alice", "alice@example.com"));

    var found = userRepository.findByEmail("alice@example.com");

    assertThat(found).isPresent();
    assertThat(found.get().getName()).isEqualTo("Alice");
  }
}

API Tests with MockMvc

Test controller layer with full Spring context:

@WebMvcTest(UserController.class)
class UserControllerTest {

  @Autowired private MockMvc mockMvc;
  @MockBean private UserService userService;

  @Test
  void createUser_validInput_returns201() throws Exception {
    var user = new UserDto(1L, "Alice", "alice@example.com");
    when(userService.create(any())).thenReturn(user);

    mockMvc.perform(post("/api/users")
            .contentType(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
            .content("""
                {"name": "Alice", "email": "alice@example.com"}
                """))
        .andExpect(status().isCreated())
        .andExpect(jsonPath("$.name").value("Alice"));
  }

  @Test
  void createUser_invalidEmail_returns400() throws Exception {
    mockMvc.perform(post("/api/users")
            .contentType(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
            .content("""
                {"name": "Alice", "email": "not-an-email"}
                """))
        .andExpect(status().isBadRequest());
  }
}

Phase 4: Security Scan

# Dependency CVEs
mvn org.owasp:dependency-check-maven:check
# or
./gradlew dependencyCheckAnalyze

# Secrets in source
grep -rn "password\s*=\s*\"" src/ --include="*.java" --include="*.yml" --include="*.properties"
grep -rn "sk-\|api_key\|secret" src/ --include="*.java" --include="*.yml"

# Secrets (git history)
git secrets --scan  # if configured

Common Security Findings

# Check for System.out.println (use logger instead)
grep -rn "System\.out\.print" src/main/ --include="*.java"

# Check for raw exception messages in responses
grep -rn "e\.getMessage()" src/main/ --include="*.java"

# Check for wildcard CORS
grep -rn "allowedOrigins.*\*" src/main/ --include="*.java"

Phase 5: Lint/Format (optional gate)

mvn spotless:apply   # if using Spotless plugin
./gradlew spotlessApply

Phase 6: Diff Review

git diff --stat
git diff

Checklist:

  • No debugging logs left (System.out, log.debug without guards)
  • Meaningful errors and HTTP statuses
  • Transactions and validation present where needed
  • Config changes documented

Output Template

VERIFICATION REPORT
===================
Build:     [PASS/FAIL]
Static:    [PASS/FAIL] (spotbugs/pmd/checkstyle)
Tests:     [PASS/FAIL] (X/Y passed, Z% coverage)
Security:  [PASS/FAIL] (CVE findings: N)
Diff:      [X files changed]

Overall:   [READY / NOT READY]

Issues to Fix:
1. ...
2. ...

Continuous Mode

  • Re-run phases on significant changes or every 30–60 minutes in long sessions
  • Keep a short loop: mvn -T 4 test + spotbugs for quick feedback

Remember: Fast feedback beats late surprises. Keep the gate strict—treat warnings as defects in production systems.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

accessibility

FreeSummary

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-eval

FreeSummary

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 5, 2026

See all skills by affaan-m

Report a problem with this skill