Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

behavior-validation

Validates a running application, CLI, API, service, or generated artifact as a user or operator against a prewritten observable behavior contract while remaining source-blind. Use for acceptance checks, runtime proof, anti-fake probes, release smoke tests, or an independent companion to code review. Not for source-quality findings, root-cause diagnosis, or visual design judgment outside the contract.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md2.0 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml227 B
  • references/behavior-contract.md512 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Behavior Validation

Judge what the product does, not how its source appears to do it.

Establish isolation

Write or read the behavior contract before exercising the target. Use behavior-contract.md. The contract must name user tasks, expected outcomes, setup, allowed interfaces, negative cases, and required evidence.

Do not inspect source, diffs, internal tests, Git history, or implementation notes during validation. Interact only through public browser, CLI, API, artifact, accessibility, or operator surfaces. If source is required, mark the clause blocked and hand it to root-cause-debugging.

Exercise the contract

  1. Run each task through the same entry point a real user or operator uses.
  2. Vary input and state to detect hard-coded success, stale data, or display-only behavior.
  3. Test invalid, empty, interrupted, retry, persistence, and permission paths where the contract makes them relevant.
  4. Capture redacted screenshots, terminal excerpts, response summaries, or artifact facts.
  5. Mark every clause pass, fail, blocked, or out of scope. Lack of evidence is not a pass.

When a finding is fixed, rerun the failed clause and nearby regression probes; do not rerun unrelated expensive scenarios without reason.

Completion condition

Every relevant contract clause has a status and reproducible evidence, anti-fake probes were attempted, secrets and private data were excluded, and the report does not infer implementation defects from observable symptoms.

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

Designs and runs reproducible evaluations for AI agents, prompts, tools, skills, and model-backed workflows using realistic datasets, isolated baselines, objective assertions, rubric grading, trajectory analysis, cost/latency tracking, and regression comparison. Use when measuring agent quality, optimizing skill triggering, comparing prompts or models, or gating an AI feature release. Not for ordinary deterministic unit tests.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

Designs or reviews HTTP, REST, GraphQL, RPC, CLI, webhook, event, and service interfaces with explicit inputs, outputs, errors, compatibility, idempotency, pagination, authentication, versioning, and observability. Use when introducing or changing an API or cross-component contract. Not for internal implementation details with no boundary or for debugging one API failure; use root-cause-debugging there.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

Reviews an existing codebase for structural friction, unclear ownership, leaky or shallow interfaces, excessive coupling, misplaced state, poor testability, and risky dependency direction, then prioritizes evidence-backed improvement candidates. Use for architecture audits, modularization, modernization, or recurring cross-cutting change pain. Not for designing one new interface, simplifying a local function, or fixing a reproduced bug.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

Closes a completed development branch by checking the final diff and proof, presenting merge, pull-request, keep, or discard options, and cleaning up only after the user or repository workflow chooses a path. Use when feature work is complete and the branch must be integrated or retired. Not for claiming a feature is complete before verification.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

Tests a real web user flow with a browser by asserting semantic behavior, network and loading states, keyboard access, responsive layouts, and stable visual evidence. Use for browser bugs, end-to-end UI behavior, responsive or accessibility checks, and screenshot baselines. Not for static source review without a browser or for backend-only tests.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

Simplifies recently changed or explicitly scoped code while preserving observable behavior, error semantics, side effects, ordering, and public contracts. Use for readability cleanup, dead-code removal, reducing nesting, eliminating redundant wrappers, or making an implementation easier to maintain. Not for architecture redesign, new behavior, speculative cleanup, or a refactor without an adequate safety net.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

thiientv/godmode98Updated Aug 26, 2026

See all skills by thiientv

Report a problem with this skill