Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Generate context-aware quality checklists for code review and QA using IEEE 1028 base standards plus LLM contextual additions
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Generate comprehensive, context-aware quality checklists combining IEEE 1028 standards (80-90%) with LLM-generated contextual items (10-20%). Ensures systematic quality validation before completion.
Core principle: Universal quality standards enhanced with project-specific context.
Always:
Exceptions:
The following categories are included in every checklist (80-90% of items):
The skill analyzes the current project context to add 10-20% contextual items:
Read project files to identify:
Generate contextual items based on findings:
TypeScript Projects:
any types unless justified with commentReact Projects:
API Projects:
Database Projects:
Python Projects:
Mobile Projects:
DevOps/Infrastructure:
Checklists are returned as markdown with checkboxes:
# Quality Checklist
Generated: {timestamp}
Context: {detected frameworks/languages}
## Code Quality (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Code follows project style guide
- [ ] No code duplication
- [ ] Cyclomatic complexity < 10
## Testing (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Tests written first (TDD followed)
- [ ] Test coverage ≥ 80%
- [ ] Tests cover edge cases
## Security (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Input validation on all user inputs
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets
- [ ] OWASP Top 10 considered
## Performance (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] No obvious performance bottlenecks
- [ ] Database queries optimized
- [ ] Appropriate caching used
## Documentation (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Public APIs documented
- [ ] README updated if needed
- [ ] CHANGELOG updated
## Error Handling (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] All error conditions handled
- [ ] User-friendly error messages
- [ ] Detailed logs for debugging
## Context-Specific Items (AI-Generated)
{Detected: TypeScript + React + REST API}
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] TypeScript types exported properly
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] React components use proper memo
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] API rate limiting implemented
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] OpenAPI docs updated
---
**Total Items**: {count}
**IEEE Base**: {ieee_count} ({percentage}%)
**Contextual**: {contextual_count} ({percentage}%)
Skill({ skill: 'checklist-generator' });
This will:
// Provide explicit context
Skill({
skill: 'checklist-generator',
args: 'typescript react api',
});
// Part of QA validation
Skill({ skill: 'checklist-generator' });
// Use checklist for systematic validation
Skill({ skill: 'qa-workflow' });
The qa agent uses this skill for validation:
Used as pre-completion gate:
Used during code review:
1. Read package.json or requirements.txt or go.mod
→ Extract dependencies
2. Glob for framework-specific files:
- React: **/*.jsx, **/*.tsx, package.json with "react"
- Vue: **/*.vue, package.json with "vue"
- Next.js: next.config.js, app/**, pages/**
- FastAPI: **/main.py with "from fastapi"
- Django: **/settings.py, **/models.py
3. Analyze imports/dependencies:
- TypeScript: tsconfig.json
- GraphQL: **/*.graphql, **/*.gql
- Docker: Dockerfile, docker-compose.yml
- Kubernetes: **/*.yaml in k8s/ or manifests/
4. Generate contextual items based on detected stack
5. Mark all generated items with [AI-GENERATED]
Input Context:
package.json contains: "react": "^18.0.0", "typescript": "^5.0.0"src/components/*.tsx, src/api/*.tsGenerated Checklist:
# Quality Checklist
Generated: 2026-01-28 10:30:00
Context: TypeScript, React, REST API
## Code Quality (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Code follows project style guide
- [ ] No code duplication
- [ ] Cyclomatic complexity < 10
- [ ] Functions have single responsibility
- [ ] Variable names clear and descriptive
- [ ] Magic numbers replaced with constants
- [ ] Dead code removed
## Testing (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Tests written first (TDD)
- [ ] All new code has tests
- [ ] Tests cover edge cases
- [ ] Test coverage ≥ 80%
- [ ] Integration tests present
- [ ] Tests isolated (no order dependency)
## Security (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Input validation on all inputs
- [ ] No SQL injection risks
- [ ] No XSS vulnerabilities
- [ ] Sensitive data encrypted
- [ ] Auth/authz checks present
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets
- [ ] OWASP Top 10 reviewed
## Performance (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] No performance bottlenecks
- [ ] Database queries optimized
- [ ] Caching used appropriately
- [ ] Resource cleanup (connections)
- [ ] No infinite loop risks
- [ ] Large data paginated
## Documentation (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] Public APIs documented
- [ ] Complex logic has comments
- [ ] README updated
- [ ] CHANGELOG updated
- [ ] Breaking changes documented
## Error Handling (IEEE 1028)
- [ ] All errors handled
- [ ] User-friendly error messages
- [ ] Detailed logs for debugging
- [ ] No swallowed exceptions
- [ ] Graceful degradation
- [ ] Rollback procedures
## TypeScript (AI-Generated)
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Types exported from modules
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] No `any` types (justified if used)
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Strict null checks satisfied
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Interfaces prefer over types
## React (AI-GENERATED)
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Components use React.memo appropriately
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Hooks follow Rules of Hooks
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] No unnecessary re-renders
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Keys on list items
## REST API (AI-GENERATED)
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Rate limiting implemented
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] API versioning in URLs
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] Request/response validation
- [ ] [AI-GENERATED] OpenAPI/Swagger updated
---
**Total Items**: 38
**IEEE Base**: 30 (79%)
**Contextual**: 8 (21%)
verification-before-completion to enforce this gate; skipping checklist validation defeats the entire purpose of the skill.| Anti-Pattern | Why It Fails | Correct Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Generating without context analysis | Produces generic, irrelevant checklist items | Detect framework/language/patterns first |
| Exceeding 50 items | Long checklists are abandoned mid-review | Cut ruthlessly; keep to ≤50 high-value items |
| No [AI-GENERATED] prefix on contextual items | Conflates standards with suggestions | Mark all AI-contextual items clearly |
| Non-verifiable items ("code is clean") | Can't be definitively checked off | Only include objectively pass/fail items |
| Skipping checklist for "small" changes | Small changes introduce large bugs | Apply checklist proportionally for every change |
qa-workflow - Systematic QA validation with fix loopsverification-before-completion - Pre-completion gatetdd - Test-driven development (testing checklist items)security-architect - Security-specific validationThis skill is used by:
qa - Quality assurance validationdeveloper - Pre-completion checkscode-reviewer - Code review criteriaBefore starting:
Read .claude/context/memory/learnings.md
Check for:
After completing:
.claude/context/memory/learnings.md.claude/context/memory/issues.md.claude/context/memory/decisions.mdASSUME INTERRUPTION: If it's not in memory, it didn't happen.
아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when you want to improve response quality through meta-cognitive reasoning. Applies 15+ reasoning methods to reconsider and refine initial outputs.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Creates specialized AI agents on-demand when no existing agent matches a request. Use when the Router cannot find a suitable agent for a task. Enables self-evolution by generating persistent agents.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
LLM-as-judge evaluation framework with 5-dimension rubric (accuracy, groundedness, coherence, completeness, helpfulness) for scoring AI-generated content quality with weighted composite scores and evidence citations
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.