본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

sonarqube-maintainability-gate

Run SonarQube/SonarCloud against production code to surface Code Smells, Bugs, and Maintainability ratings - the maintainability lens rather than the security lens. Production-only scope via sonar.exclusions; test code is reviewed separately. Use when a team wants maintainability and technical-debt ratings gating PRs, or when an existing SonarQube project reports numbers nobody has tied to a quality gate.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa스타 13(GitHub 13 + cccskills 0)

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB
  • .tessl-plugin/plugin.json554 B

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

sonarqube-maintainability-gate

SonarQube classifies issues across three software qualities - Reliability, Maintainability, Security - and four Clean Code attributes (Consistent, Intentional, Adaptable, Responsible) per the SonarSource docs (see Issues introduction). qa-security-scanning's sonarqube-rules skill covers the Security lens; this skill covers the Reliability + Maintainability lens for production code.

When to use

  • A pull request touches production code and you want Bug/Code-Smell metrics scoped to the diff (not test files).
  • Pre-merge Quality Gate enforcement on the Sonar Way default (no new issues; new-code coverage ≥80%; new-code duplication ≤3% - per Sonar Way QG).
  • Legacy codebase entering Sonar adoption - focus on new code only to avoid baseline-debt theater.

Step 1 - Install scanner

StackScanner
Mavensonar-maven-plugin (mvn sonar:sonar)
Gradleorg.sonarqube plugin (./gradlew sonar)
.NETdotnet-sonarscanner
Anything elsesonar-scanner CLI

See the SonarQube docs sitemap for per-build-tool installation.

Step 2 - Scope to production code

Add to sonar-project.properties:

sonar.projectKey=acme.platform
sonar.sources=src
sonar.tests=tests,src/**/*.test.ts
sonar.exclusions=**/*.generated.*,**/migrations/**,**/vendor/**
sonar.test.inclusions=**/*.test.ts,**/*.spec.ts,tests/**
sonar.coverage.exclusions=**/*.generated.*,**/main.ts

Why separate sonar.tests vs sonar.sources: test code has different quality expectations (long names, deliberate duplication for clarity, Arrange-Act-Assert patterns). Lumping them into one scope produces noise. Test code is reviewed separately.

Step 3 - Run scan

# Local development scan against a SonarQube server
sonar-scanner \
  -Dsonar.host.url=https://sonar.internal \
  -Dsonar.token=$SONAR_TOKEN

# CI scan with PR analysis (branch + PR decoration)
sonar-scanner \
  -Dsonar.pullrequest.key=$PR_NUMBER \
  -Dsonar.pullrequest.branch=$PR_BRANCH \
  -Dsonar.pullrequest.base=main

The scanner uploads to the configured server; results stream to the project dashboard.

Step 4 - Read the dashboard

MetricWhat it meansSonar Way default
New BugsReliability issues introduced in PR0
New Code SmellsMaintainability issues introduced in PR0
New Coverage% new lines covered by tests≥ 80%
New Duplication% new lines duplicated≤ 3%
Maintainability Rating (new code)A - E based on debt ratioA
Reliability Rating (new code)A - E based on bug densityA

Per Sonar Way QG: any condition fail blocks merge.

Step 5 - Quality Gate as CI gate

# GitHub Actions
- name: SonarQube Scan
  uses: SonarSource/sonarqube-scan-action@v3
  env:
    SONAR_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.SONAR_TOKEN }}
- name: SonarQube Quality Gate Check
  uses: SonarSource/sonarqube-quality-gate-action@v1
  timeout-minutes: 5
  env:
    SONAR_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.SONAR_TOKEN }}

The quality-gate-action polls the server until the gate result lands and fails the build if it's RED.

Anti-patterns

Anti-patternWhy it failsFix
Scan whole repo without sonar.tests separationTest conventions flagged as smells; team disables SonarSplit sonar.sources / sonar.tests (Step 2)
Apply gate to overall code, not new codeLegacy debt blocks all PRs foreverUse new-code-period gate (Sonar Way default)
Mix this with the sonarqube-rules security settingsTwo skills mutating same sonar-project.propertiesThis skill owns Reliability+Maintainability; sonarqube-rules owns the Security profile
Lower gate to merge pre-existing failuresGate becomes meaninglessUse "Wont Fix" / "Accepted" issue resolution + scope-exclusion comment instead
Run after merge onlyNo PR decoration; hard to reviewRun on PR with sonar.pullrequest.* flags (Step 3)

Limitations

  • Sonar Way thresholds are tuned for greenfield + healthy codebases. Brownfield rollout: keep gate but mark all pre-existing as "Accepted" with re-review date + waiver template (Reason: + Approved-by: + Re-review-date: + expires:).
  • Self-hosted SonarQube (Community) does not include MQR severity granularity; SonarCloud + Enterprise do.

References

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

a11y-violation-gate

무료

Builds a CI gate that fails the build on **new** WCAG / a11y violations introduced by a PR while grandfathering pre-existing violations on a per-rule / per-page baseline. Aggregates verdicts from axe-core / pa11y / Lighthouse a11y / WAVE / IBM Equal Access scans. Use when a project has accumulated a11y debt and a strict "zero violations" gate would block every PR - the ratchet pattern lets the team ship while preventing regressions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

ab-test-validity-checklist

무료

Workflow skill that builds an A/B-test validity checklist from an experiment proposal, walking the canonical design-correctness gates - pre-registered OEC/power/guardrails, randomization unit + SRM check, assignment integrity, telemetry, peeking discipline, novelty/primacy, post-experiment SRM re-check - into a per-experiment checklist + sign-off form. Use when launching, auditing, or governing an experiment. For pitfall mechanics (guardrails, peeking) see experiment-results-interpreter's references; to read an already-valid result use experiment-results-interpreter; for per-SDK harness tests use experiment-sdk-testing - this gates DESIGN, not SDK code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

add-to-homescreen-flow-tests

무료

The single install-flow skill: the reference contract for the PWA install flow (installability gate fields, `beforeinstallprompt` handshake, per-platform paths - Android WebAPK / iOS Share menu / Firefox no-op - and the `display-mode` post-install signal, in references/install-flow-reference.md) plus the build-an-X workflow that emits the Add-to-Home-Screen suite. Walks the four-stage timeline, emitting one test per gate cell per [web.dev/articles/install-criteria][install-criteria], the deferred-prompt → `prompt()` → `userChoice` chain per [web.dev/articles/customize-install][customize-install], the iOS Safari manual-metadata branch (`apple-touch-icon`) per [web.dev/learn/pwa/installation][learn-pwa], and the post-install `(display-mode: standalone)` MQ assertion. Output: a Playwright spec with per-stage cells plus a coverage matrix. Use when a PWA's manifest, icons, or install handler change, when install conversion drops at an unknown stage, or when triaging a flaky install assertion.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

ai-spec-coverage-mapper

무료

Build-an-X workflow that uses an LLM to map existing tests to spec sections - given a spec doc + the test suite, the LLM identifies which tests cover which sections, surfaces uncovered sections (gap), and recommends specific tests to add. Output is a coverage matrix per spec ID. Scope is mapping tests that already exist and naming the gaps, not authoring tests for new acceptance criteria. Use when a spec doc and a test suite both exist but nobody can say which requirements are actually covered - before a release sign-off, an audit, or a decision about where to spend the next round of test effort.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

ai-test-generator

무료

Generates tests from natural-language specs (acceptance criteria, user stories, requirements) using an LLM, with confidence scoring per test case (LLM self-assessment plus heuristics: assertion quality, naming, completeness), batching uncertain cases for human review, and integration with the team's existing test framework. Use when the user asks to generate unit tests from acceptance criteria, convert user stories to test cases, automate test creation from requirements, or augment a spec-driven test suite with AI-generated stubs that are then curated before merge.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

allure-reports

무료

Configures Allure Report (test-runner adapter install, `allure-results` directory wiring, `categories.json` for failure classification, `history-trend.json` retention via the copy-history-between-runs pattern), runs the Allure CLI to convert `allure-results` to a static HTML site, and uploads the report as a CI artifact. Use when the team needs richer test reporting than JUnit XML - step-level attachments, per-test history, retry tracking, and severity / epic / feature labeling across framework-agnostic adapters (pytest, Jest, JUnit, TestNG, NUnit, Mocha). As a rich static HTML report generator, it is the open-source alternative to the sunset ExtentReports (JVM/.NET per-test HTML narrative); for hosted cross-run flakiness analytics rather than a static per-run report use currents-integration.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

testland/qa132026년 10월 20일 업데이트

testland의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고