Use when reviewing UI for accessibility — WCAG 2.2 AA, keyboard nav, focus, ARIA, contrast, screen-reader semantics — even on 'is this a11y-OK?' or 'mach das barrierefrei'.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Paste a URL/snippet before you borrow it — detects its license, runs the derived compatibility policy, and drafts a provenance ledger entry — even before any code is written, not after
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
code-provenance rule fired and its
step 3 ("check license compatibility") needs a concrete answer.origin: uncertain self-flag surfaces a borrow that was
never checked.Do NOT use when:
license-compliance-credits to
regenerate notices instead.license-compliance-audit.This skill answers ONE question: is the source's license compatible with
this repo's license, under the derived compatibility policy? An allow
verdict means the license permits the reuse — it says nothing about whether
the code-provenance discipline (read,
close the source, re-derive against house standards) was actually followed.
License-clean code that is still a verbatim copy is still a violation of
that rule. Run both checks; treat neither as a substitute for the other.
git log -1 --format=%H -- <path> on the source repo, or the URL's own commit ref).LICENSE/
LICENSE.md/COPYING file at the source repo root; the source's
package.json "license" field; its composer.json "license" field;
an SPDX header comment in the file itself. If none resolve to a known
SPDX id, the license is unknown — never guess permissive.npx tsx node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/detect_target_license.ts . --json
If license-policy.yaml exists at the repo root, read its
policy.{allow,conditional,deny} buckets directly. If it does not (dry
run only), derive the same buckets by hand from this repo's own
LICENSE file and the compatibility matrix in
node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/_lib/detect_target_license.ts
(COMPATIBILITY_MATRIX/classifyBorrow).unknown), then read the verdict off the target's policy buckets:
allow, conditional (escalate), or deny. A source license of
unknown is always deny — no exception.allow → continue to step 6 (draft the ledger entry).conditional → STOP. Do not write the borrowed code yet. Escalate to
the user with the exact matrix cell that triggered it (per
ask-when-uncertain) — never
auto-clear a conditional verdict.deny → refuse the borrow. Name the alternative: write it from
scratch, find a permissively-licensed equivalent, or ask the
maintainer for an explicit, recorded exception.node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/schemas/provenance-borrow.schema.json (source_url,
license, source_sha, borrowed_at, files, transformation_note,
cleared_by). Write a transformation_note that names a real
structural change — rename-only phrasing (e.g. "renamed variables",
"cosmetic rename") is rejected by lint_provenance.ts even if the code
has not landed yet, so draft it honestly against what will actually
change.provenance/borrows.jsonl and verify:
npx tsx node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/lint_provenance.ts
Exit 0 confirms the entry is schema-valid, license-compliant, and its
transformation note passed the rename-only phrase check.allow / conditional / deny) with the
exact source class → target class cell that produced it, and the source
license's SPDX id (or unknown).conditional or deny, the specific escalation question or refusal
reason presented to the user — never a silently auto-resolved verdict.allow is not a copying clearance — see the section above; run
code-provenance's read-close-re-derive discipline regardless of the
license verdict.LICENSE file at the source is not "no license, so it's free" — an
absent license file defaults to strictest (unknown → deny), not to
permissive.conditional verdict is not a soft "probably fine" — it is a hard
stop pending human escalation; treating it as advisory is the exact
Q1 workspace-license failure mode the roadmap's council resolved against.license-policy.yaml missing does not mean skip the check — derive
the policy by hand from the matrix; a missing policy file is a detection
gap, not a green light.unknown fails the
linter outright and must escalate.conditional verdict proceed without the escalation actually
happening this turn.transformation_note that only describes a rename or
formatting change — describe the real structural change, or don't borrow.code-provenance — the rule this skill
answers step 3 of.license-compliance-credits —
regenerates docs/THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES.md once the entry lands.license-compliance-audit — the
on-demand similarity scan for suspicious diffs, not for a single known
source.node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/detect_target_license.ts, node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/_lib/detect_target_license.ts — the license-policy derivation this skill consumes.node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/lint_provenance.ts, provenance/README.md,
node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/schemas/provenance-borrow.schema.json — the ledger + its
contract.ask-when-uncertain — the escalation
shape for conditional/unknown verdicts.まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Use when reviewing UI for accessibility — WCAG 2.2 AA, keyboard nav, focus, ARIA, contrast, screen-reader semantics — even on 'is this a11y-OK?' or 'mach das barrierefrei'.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when defining or auditing the activation event — aha-moment selection, retention correlation, falsifiable definition. Triggers on 'what is our aha moment', 'redefine activation'.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when capturing an architectural decision — file naming, next ADR number, Status / Context / Decision / Consequences, index regen; fires even without saying 'ADR'.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Adversarial critique — devil's advocate, stress-test, honest teardown ('poke holes', 'be brutal', 'was hältst du davon'); explicit request only. Routine code or design review → code-review.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when reading, creating, or updating agent documentation, module docs, roadmaps, or AGENTS.md. Understands the full .augment/, agents/, and copilot-instructions structure.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use for an adversarial red-team / blue-team / auditor review of an AI agent's CONFIG + behaviour (rules, skills, MCP, hooks, permissions) — attack-chain → defensive-gap list, not a code audit.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。