Use when long-lived agents, project memories, system prompts, or playbooks are repeatedly summarized, rewritten, or optimized and risk losing domain detail, provenance, or execution learnings.
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 deploying to production, releasing a significant user-facing change, migrating data or infrastructure, or opening a beta. Covers the pre-launch checklist, staged rollout, monitoring, and rollback planning for deployments that carry risk.
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。
Attribution: Sourced from addyosmani/agent-skills by Addy Osmani, licensed MIT. Modified for this collection.
Ship with confidence. The goal is not just to deploy — it's to deploy safely, with monitoring in place, a rollback plan ready, and a clear understanding of what success looks like. Every launch should be reversible, observable, and incremental.
console.log debugging statements in production codenpm audit shows no critical or high vulnerabilitiesShip behind feature flags to decouple deployment from release:
// Feature flag check
const flags = await getFeatureFlags(userId);
if (flags.taskSharing) {
// New feature: task sharing
return <TaskSharingPanel task={task} />;
}
// Default: existing behavior
return null;
Feature flag lifecycle:
1. DEPLOY with flag OFF → Code is in production but inactive
2. ENABLE for team/beta → Internal testing in production environment
3. GRADUAL ROLLOUT → 5% → 25% → 50% → 100% of users
4. MONITOR at each stage → Watch error rates, performance, user feedback
5. CLEAN UP → Remove flag and dead code path after full rollout
Rules:
1. DEPLOY to staging
└── Full test suite in staging environment
└── Manual smoke test of critical flows
2. DEPLOY to production (feature flag OFF)
└── Verify deployment succeeded (health check)
└── Check error monitoring (no new errors)
3. ENABLE for team (flag ON for internal users)
└── Team uses the feature in production
└── 24-hour monitoring window
4. CANARY rollout (flag ON for 5% of users)
└── Monitor error rates, latency, user behavior
└── Compare metrics: canary vs. baseline
└── 24-48 hour monitoring window
└── Advance only if all thresholds pass (see table below)
5. GRADUAL increase (25% -> 50% -> 100%)
└── Same monitoring at each step
└── Ability to roll back to previous percentage at any point
6. FULL rollout (flag ON for all users)
└── Monitor for 1 week
└── Clean up feature flag
Use these thresholds to decide whether to advance, hold, or roll back at each stage:
| Metric | Advance (green) | Hold and investigate (yellow) | Roll back (red) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Error rate | Within 10% of baseline | 10-100% above baseline | >2x baseline |
| P95 latency | Within 20% of baseline | 20-50% above baseline | >50% above baseline |
| Client JS errors | No new error types | New errors at <0.1% of sessions | New errors at >0.1% of sessions |
| Business metrics | Neutral or positive | Decline <5% (may be noise) | Decline >5% |
Roll back immediately if:
Application metrics:
├── Error rate (total and by endpoint)
├── Response time (p50, p95, p99)
├── Request volume
├── Active users
└── Key business metrics (conversion, engagement)
Infrastructure metrics:
├── CPU and memory utilization
├── Database connection pool usage
├── Disk space
├── Network latency
└── Queue depth (if applicable)
Client metrics:
├── Core Web Vitals (LCP, INP, CLS)
├── JavaScript errors
├── API error rates from client perspective
└── Page load time
// Set up error boundary with reporting
class ErrorBoundary extends React.Component {
componentDidCatch(error: Error, info: React.ErrorInfo) {
// Report to error tracking service
reportError(error, {
componentStack: info.componentStack,
userId: getCurrentUser()?.id,
page: window.location.pathname,
});
}
render() {
if (this.state.hasError) {
return <ErrorFallback onRetry={() => this.setState({ hasError: false })} />;
}
return this.props.children;
}
}
// Server-side error reporting
app.use((err: Error, req: Request, res: Response, next: NextFunction) => {
reportError(err, {
method: req.method,
url: req.url,
userId: req.user?.id,
});
// Don't expose internals to users
res.status(500).json({
error: { code: 'INTERNAL_ERROR', message: 'Something went wrong' },
});
});
In the first hour after launch:
1. Check health endpoint returns 200
2. Check error monitoring dashboard (no new error types)
3. Check latency dashboard (no regression)
4. Test the critical user flow manually
5. Verify logs are flowing and readable
6. Confirm rollback mechanism works (dry run if possible)
Every deployment needs a rollback plan before it happens:
## Rollback Plan for [Feature/Release]
### Trigger Conditions
- Error rate > 2x baseline
- P95 latency > [X]ms
- User reports of [specific issue]
### Rollback Steps
1. Disable feature flag (if applicable)
OR
1. Deploy previous version: `git revert <commit> && git push`
2. Verify rollback: health check, error monitoring
3. Communicate: notify team of rollback
### Database Considerations
- Migration [X] has a rollback: `npx prisma migrate rollback`
- Data inserted by new feature: [preserved / cleaned up]
### Time to Rollback
- Feature flag: < 1 minute
- Redeploy previous version: < 5 minutes
- Database rollback: < 15 minutes
references/security-checklist.mdreferences/performance-checklist.mdreferences/accessibility-checklist.md| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "It works in staging, it'll work in production" | Production has different data, traffic patterns, and edge cases. Monitor after deploy. |
| "We don't need feature flags for this" | Every feature benefits from a kill switch. Even "simple" changes can break things. |
| "Monitoring is overhead" | Not having monitoring means you discover problems from user complaints instead of dashboards. |
| "We'll add monitoring later" | Add it before launch. You can't debug what you can't see. |
| "Rolling back is admitting failure" | Rolling back is responsible engineering. Shipping a broken feature is the failure. |
Before deploying:
After deploying:
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 long-lived agents, project memories, system prompts, or playbooks are repeatedly summarized, rewritten, or optimized and risk losing domain detail, provenance, or execution learnings.
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 this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.
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。
Adds educational comments to a code file so it becomes a learning resource, asking for the file (with a list of close matches) if none is given. Use when preparing code for learners, onboarding, or teaching.
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。
Write, debug, and optimize Adobe Illustrator automation scripts using ExtendScript (JavaScript/JSX). Use when creating or modifying scripts that manipulate documents, layers, paths, text frames, colors, symbols, artboards, or any Illustrator DOM objects. Covers the complete JavaScript object model, coordinate system, measurement units, export workflows, and scripting best practices.
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。
Patterns and techniques for adding governance, safety, and trust controls to AI agent systems. Use this skill when: - Building AI agents that call external tools (APIs, databases, file systems) - Implementing policy-based access controls for agent tool usage - Adding semantic intent classification to detect dangerous prompts - Creating trust scoring systems for multi-agent workflows - Building audit trails for agent actions and decisions - Enforcing rate limits, content filters, or tool restrictions on agents - Working with any agent framework (PydanticAI, CrewAI, OpenAI Agents, LangChain, AutoGen)
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。
Check any AI agent codebase against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 risks. Use this skill when: - Evaluating an agent system's security posture before production deployment - Running a compliance check against OWASP ASI 2026 standards - Mapping existing security controls to the 10 agentic risks - Generating a compliance report for security review or audit - Comparing agent framework security features against the standard - Any request like "is my agent OWASP compliant?", "check ASI compliance", or "agentic security 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。