본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

update-deps

Audit npm dependencies before updating them with Bun. Check maintainers, release age, signatures, published file changes, and release notes, then update packages that pass review and record deferred updates for later follow-up.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Audit and update npm/Bun dependencies with supply chain integrity checks — verifies maintainers, publish age, tarball diffs, and provenance before bumping. Defers risky packages to ~/.supply-chain/notes/.

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Auditing dependency updates before installation
  • Checking maintainer changes and suspicious package contents
  • Updating packages that pass integrity checks
  • Revisiting updates deferred in earlier audits

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md7.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Update Dependencies

Audit outdated packages, verify supply chain integrity, bump what's safe, defer what needs review, and log everything.

This process has three phases: discovery, integrity audit, and execution. The integrity audit is the most important — every package gets checked before it touches the lockfile.

Phase 1: Discovery

Run bun outdated to get the full list of packages with available updates.

bun outdated

Parse the output into a structured list. For each package, note:

  • Package name
  • Current version
  • Available update version
  • Whether it's age-gated (indicated by * in the output — the footnote "The * indicates that version isn't true latest due to minimum release age" confirms this)
  • Whether it's a runtime dep, dev dep, or peer dep

Also check whether any packages are blocked entirely by the age gate (like @pierre/diffs was when its minimum semver range couldn't resolve). Flag these separately — they may need minimumReleaseAgeExcludes in bunfig.toml.

Phase 2: Integrity Audit

This is the core of the process. Spawn one Sonnet sub-agent per package to run the integrity check in parallel. Sonnet is used here because these are independent, structured verification tasks that don't need heavier reasoning.

Each sub-agent receives the package name, current version, and target version, and performs the following checks:

Sub-agent prompt template

For each outdated package, spawn a Sonnet agent with this task:

You are auditing the npm package "{package}" for a version bump from {current} to {target}.

Run these checks and report back with a JSON object:

1. **Maintainer verification**: Check if maintainers changed between versions.
   npm view {package}@{current} maintainers --json
   npm view {package}@{target} maintainers --json
   Compare the two lists. Flag any additions or removals.

2. **Publish date and age**: Get the publish timestamp.
   npm view {package} time --json
   Extract the date for version {target}. Calculate days since publication.
   Flag if younger than 7 days.

3. **Provenance**: Check if the package has registry signatures or attestations.
   npm audit signatures (if not already run this session)
   Note whether the package has provenance attestations.

4. **Tarball diff**: Show what actually changed in the published package.
   npm diff --diff={package}@{current} --diff={package}@{target}
   Summarize the changes:
   - How many files changed
   - Are changes limited to version bumps, deps, and rebuilt dist? Or are there meaningful source changes?
   - Any new runtime dependencies added?
   - Any suspicious patterns (obfuscated code, eval(), network calls in unexpected places)

5. **Release notes**: Try to find what changed.
   Check the package's repository for release notes or changelog:
   npm view {package}@{target} repository.url
   gh release view v{target} --repo <owner/repo> (try with and without v prefix)
   Summarize the changelog if found.

Report your findings as JSON:

{{
  "package": "{package}",
  "from": "{current}",
  "to": "{target}",
  "age_days": <number>,
  "maintainers_changed": <boolean>,
  "maintainers_added": [],
  "maintainers_removed": [],
  "provenance": <boolean>,
  "new_runtime_deps": [],
  "files_changed": <number>,
  "has_source_changes": <boolean>,
  "changelog_summary": "<brief summary>",
  "suspicious_patterns": [],
  "verdict": "safe" | "review" | "defer",
  "verdict_reason": "<one sentence explanation>"
}}

Verdict guidelines:
- "safe": Same maintainers, no new runtime deps, changes match what changelog describes, no suspicious patterns
- "review": Minor concerns (e.g., new maintainer who is clearly from the same org, small new dep from known publisher)
- "defer": Maintainer changes from unknown accounts, new runtime deps with unclear purpose, suspicious code patterns, substantive API changes that need integration testing

Collecting results

As sub-agents complete, collect their JSON reports. If a sub-agent fails or times out, mark that package as "defer" with reason "audit failed".

Tier classification

After collecting all results, classify packages into tiers. This helps the user understand the risk profile at a glance:

TierDescriptionTypical action
Runtime, high surfaceLibraries your code calls directly (parsers, diff engines, UI libs)Check provenance, review diff, run tests
SDK/API depsThird-party service SDKs (agent SDKs, platform integrations)Read changelog for API changes, test integration
Dev-onlyType definitions, build tools, test frameworksUpdate freely — these don't ship
Build toolchainBun itself, compilers, bundlersMost caution — breakage affects all outputs

Phase 3: Execution

Bump safe packages

For all packages with verdict "safe":

bun update pkg1@version1 pkg2@version2 ...

If the update fails due to age gate conflicts (a package's minimum semver can't resolve), add it to minimumReleaseAgeExcludes in bunfig.toml and document why.

Log to supply chain notes

Write the full audit results to ~/.supply-chain/notes/<YYYY-MM-DD>.json:

{
  "date": "YYYY-MM-DD",
  "project": "plannotator",
  "bumped": [
    {
      "package": "...",
      "from": "...",
      "to": "...",
      "age_days": 0,
      "maintainers_changed": false,
      "provenance": false,
      "notes": "..."
    }
  ],
  "deferred": [
    {
      "package": "...",
      "current": "...",
      "available": "...",
      "age_days": 0,
      "maintainers_changed": false,
      "reason": "...",
      "review_by": "YYYY-MM-DD"
    }
  ],
  "excluded_from_age_gate": [
    {
      "package": "...",
      "reason": "..."
    }
  ]
}

Set review_by to 7 days from today for deferred packages.

Check previously deferred packages

Read all files in ~/.supply-chain/notes/ and collect any deferred packages from previous audits that are still at the same version in the current lockfile. These are packages that were deferred before and still haven't been updated.

To check: for each previously deferred entry, see if the current installed version matches the current field from the deferral note. If it does, the package is still deferred.

Phase 4: Recap

Present a clear summary to the user:

Updated

List each bumped package with version change and one-line reason it was safe.

Deferred

List each deferred package with version change and reason for deferral.

Still Deferred (from previous audits)

List any packages that were deferred in previous audit sessions and still haven't been bumped. Include the original deferral date and reason. This is the "you've been putting this off" section — it keeps deferred packages from being forgotten.

If the still-deferred list is empty, say so — that's a good sign.

Age Gate Exclusions

If any packages were added to minimumReleaseAgeExcludes, note them and why.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Use Plannotator to review plans, code changes, documents, and running local apps in a browser. This reference covers returning feedback to agents, browsing past decisions, sharing guided code reviews, and leaving questions for later replies.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Reviewing and approving plans or specifications
  • Reviewing local code changes or pull requests
  • Annotating documents or running local apps
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Review Markdown files, HTML files, URLs, or folders in Plannotator’s annotation interface. The agent responds to requested changes and distinguishes them from approvals, optional approval notes, and sessions closed without feedback.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Reviewing a Markdown document
  • Collecting comments on HTML or web pages
  • Opening a folder for annotation
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Open files, folders, or URLs in Plannotator’s annotation interface, then have the agent address the returned comments. Use it to review Markdown, plain-text configuration files, or HTML through a shared feedback workflow.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Reviewing a Markdown document
  • Commenting on configuration files
  • Opening a folder for annotation
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Open documents, text configuration files, HTML, URLs, or folders in Plannotator for browser review. The agent responds to returned annotations and can use an approval session when you need to accept a plan, specification, or document.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Adding document feedback in a browser
  • Reviewing text configuration files or HTML
  • Approving a generated plan or specification
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Analyze rejected plans and reviewer feedback to identify recurring concerns, changing expectations, and concrete prompt improvements. Produce an HTML dashboard from Plannotator archives, or use Claude Code plan rejection reasons when those archives are unavailable.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Finding recurring reasons for plan rejection
  • Understanding how review expectations changed
  • Deriving planning instructions from past feedback
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Open the assistant’s latest rendered message in Plannotator and return specific annotations for revision. The skill distinguishes requested edits from approval, approval with notes, and a closed session, so each review result receives the appropriate response.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Annotate the assistant’s latest response for revision
  • Approve a response without requesting further work
  • Approve with notes to guide subsequent work
backnotprop/plannotator9.5천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

backnotprop의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고