本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

senior-cto-feedback

Load for Senior CTO critique, architectural audit, risk review, sequencing correction, or refinement of an existing implementation-plan triad; edits the requested plan/context/tasks in place without creating a worktree or review file. Not for open-ended CTO advice, product implementation, or implementation workspace setup.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(8)

  • SKILL.md7.2 KB
  • resources/enterprise-self-hostable-checklist.md5.2 KB
  • resources/input-contract.md4.7 KB
  • resources/islamu-event-guardrails.md11.2 KB
  • resources/output-template.md5.2 KB
  • resources/plan-rewrite-guidance.md15.0 KB
  • resources/review-rubric.md15.4 KB
  • resources/severity-model.md4.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Resources

Rules

  1. Direct Triad Refinement — In Place Only: Update the user-requested plan.md, context.md, and tasks.md in their existing location. Do not create worktrees, create or switch branches, relocate planning artifacts, or execute implementation during review. Never write *-cto-review.md or separate feedback files.

Review depth is defined in output-template.md.

  1. Autonomous Execution Without Approval: Do NOT pause or block to ask the user for approval before editing the triad. Directly apply the architectural, sequencing, testing, and commit contract improvements.
  2. Reader-First Chat Reporting: When finishing, report back to the user with a crisp, high-signal summary following resources/output-template.md and reader-first writing. Lead with the executive verdict, concrete architectural decisions made, and modifications applied across the triad, explaining technical reasons before mechanisms. Preserve exact identifiers, boundaries, and trade-offs without making the user open the plan files.
  3. Follow I-VSD Integration: Bind updates to exact plan/tasks and I-VSD revisions. If architectural refinements change provider authority, affected stakeholders, or IVSD-* mappings, mark the I-VSD report stale in the triad metadata and record the revalidation need; do not fabricate approval.
  4. Codebase Reality Over Aspiration: Distinguish verified codebase reality from plan aspiration. Verify claims against real repository files using code-review-graph before codifying them in the triad.
  5. Socratic Stress-Testing & "Worst Break" Catastrophic Scenario: Identify the single most catastrophic production failure mode. Mandate that Phase Red in tasks.md contains dedicated failing invariant tests proving it is prevented before handler implementation.
  6. 3-Dimensional Evaluation Model: Enforce Completeness (capabilities, I-VSD mitigations), Correctness (boundary conditions, concurrency races, negative failure paths), and Coherence (Clean Architecture, HAL link affordances, tenant isolation, transactional outbox).
  7. Invariant-First & Anti-Tautology Verification: Enforce strict Test-First Invariant order in tasks.md (failing Red Phase tests before Green Phase implementation for core domain invariants, concurrency, and security). Prohibit tautological mock-mirroring (Received(1) on internal services) or framework boilerplate.
  8. Greenfield Breaking Change Posture: ISLAMU Event is pre-v1 with 0 external adopters. Reject backward-compatibility shims, deprecated aliases, and adapter baggage. Directly simplify contracts and delete obsolete paths in the plan.
  9. 4-Point "Right-Sizing" Rule: Mandate a PR split when 2+ symptoms match (multi-intent "and also" scope, > 8-10 major tasks, big-bang layer mixing, or backend slice could ship independently). Scope the active triad to the primary slice and graduate deferred scope to dev/backlog/<slug>.md.
  10. Planned Commit Readiness: Ensure every implementation phase in tasks.md has a self-sufficient declarative Conventional Commit contract (or atomic sequence) with exact metadata, paths, inspection commands, git add, path-limited git commit, and verification. These are instructions for later implementation, not actions to execute during review. Preserve explicit user implementation constraints.
  11. Knowledge Graduation: Move deferred scope to dev/backlog/<slug>.md, durable architectural decisions to docs/internal/adr/, and lessons to dev/_journal/.
  12. Zero-Loss Information Preservation: Eliminating separate review files does NOT mean discarding review intelligence. Every critical finding, 3D evaluation scorecard, Socratic stress-test challenge, ranked risk with minimum acceptable fix, "Worst Break" failure mode, and architectural trade-off MUST be permanently written into its dedicated section in plan.md (§0, §2, §5, §7.1, §12, §13/§14.2), context.md (Key Decisions, Review State), and tasks.md (Phase Red Invariant Tests). Chat output is strictly an executive summary of what is already durably preserved in the triad.

Workflow

  1. Ingest Triad In Place: Resolve the exact directory the user requested and read its plan, context, and tasks without changing checkout or branch. Verify architectural claims against actual repository code using code-review-graph.
  2. Audit Architecture: Evaluate against the 3D Scorecard, 4-Point Right-Sizing, Worst Break failure scenario, and greenfield breaking change principles.
  3. Directly Update Triad:
    • plan.md: Refine architecture, tighten sequence, define RFC 2119 behavior scenarios, remove legacy shims, update metadata CTO review status to Applied & Aligned (YYYY-MM-DD).
    • context.md: Synchronize active status, next step, key decisions, validation baseline, and blockers.
    • tasks.md: Restructure into Test-First Invariant ordering (Red -> Green -> Refactor), right-size phases, embed exact atomic commit contracts.
    • Never write any *-cto-review.md file.
  4. Report to Chat: Output the crisp, high-signal summary following resources/output-template.md (verdict, decisions made, changes applied across the triad, top risks resolved, and execution readiness).

Verification

  • Confirm zero *-cto-review.md files exist in dev/active/<task>/.
  • Confirm the updated triad remains at the exact requested path and no review branch/worktree was created.
  • Validate triad consistency: plan.md, context.md, and tasks.md agree on status, next steps, and phase breakdown.
  • Ensure frontmatter adheres to ../_SKILL_SCHEMA.md.

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Load for Blazor/MudBlazor UI changes involving forms, dialogs, focus, keyboard navigation, landmarks, ARIA, color contrast, RTL-safe styling, or WCAG 2.2 AA tests; not for backend-only changes.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

Load when a task asks to research, verify, compare, or look up framework/package behavior, release notes, standards, RFCs, CVEs, or unfamiliar APIs; use repository evidence first, then official docs, and not for codebase navigation alone.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

aspire

無料

Load for Aspire AppHost work: start/stop/wait resources, inspect dashboard/logs/traces, add integrations/resources, rebuild a service, run isolated worktrees, or diagnose Aspire orchestration; not for plain dotnet apps, container-only deployments, or cloud deployment.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

Load for authentication or authorization changes involving BFF cookies/tokens, JWT validation, claims/user ID extraction, policies, handler access checks, impersonation, or 401/403 bugs; not for UI affordance gating alone.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

Load for Blazor BFF server work involving YARP proxy routes, cookie sessions, access-token forwarding/refresh, downstream API calls, BFF handlers, or browser-to-API auth failures; not for client component rendering or API JWT validation alone.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

Load when editing Blazor `.razor.css`, scoped selectors, `::deep`, BEM class names, RTL/logical CSS properties, or styling nested MudBlazor components; not for global design tokens or non-Blazor CSS.

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。

islamu-ngo/Event82026年10月12日 更新

islamu-ngo のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する