Use when reviewing CI configuration, bundle analysis workflows, or pull requests that add dependencies and assets. Distinguish bundle-size budgets from runtime budgets such as Lighthouse or Core Web Vitals so teams can enforce both.
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。
Without automated enforcement, performance degrades gradually — each PR adds a small library, each feature adds a few KB, and within months the app that loaded in 2 seconds now takes 5. Performance budgets make regressions visible at PR time rather than after user complaints. Catching 'this PR added 200KB to the bundle' in review is far cheaper than debugging a slow production site.
Does this project have performance budgets defined? Check package.json and CI configuration for size or Lighthouse thresholds.
Set up bundle size limits with size-limit and Lighthouse CI assertions in the CI pipeline.
Explain performance budgets, how to choose appropriate thresholds, and how to enforce them with size-limit and Lighthouse CI.
Inspect CI workflows, package.json, and Lighthouse or bundle-size config for explicit thresholds. Flag repos where budgets are missing, too loose to catch regressions, or unenforced on pull requests. Check whether production RUM and alerting are wired to detect regressions after release.
For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance,
see references/rule.md.
Rule page: https://frontendchecklist.io/rules/testing/performance-budget
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 templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Create a custom 404 error page. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.
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 auditing metadata, crawlability, structured data, or indexability related to Create a dedicated About page. Verify the rendered HTML and HTTP response rather than relying only on source files.
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 reviewing component libraries, page flows, or CI pipelines that need repeatable accessibility checks. Automated testing is strongest at catching structural and attribute-level issues; it does not replace keyboard, screen reader, and manual UX testing.
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 reviewing sign-in, sign-up, MFA, CAPTCHA, recovery, and re-auth flows. Evaluate the full authentication path, including error handling and backup methods, not just the primary login form.
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 reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Make notifications accessible. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.
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 reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Use semantic table markup for screen readers. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.
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。