跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

springboot-verification

Verify Spring Boot changes through builds, static analysis that checks code without running it, tests, coverage checks, and security scans. Review the diff and produce a pass/fail report showing readiness and issues to fix.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Run the full Spring Boot verification loop — Maven or Gradle build, SpotBugs, PMD, and Checkstyle static analysis, unit and Testcontainers integration tests with JaCoCo coverage, OWASP dependency and secret scans, and diff review — producing a pass/fail readiness report. Use when preparing a Spring Boot pull request, validating coverage thresholds, or running pre-deploy verification.

集成工具PostgreSQL
查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Checking a Spring Boot service before opening a pull request
  • Verifying changes after refactoring or dependency upgrades
  • Checking test coverage against the target
  • Running verification before deployment

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Spring Boot Verification Loop

Run before PRs, after major changes, and pre-deploy.

When to Activate

  • Before opening a pull request for a Spring Boot service
  • After major refactoring or dependency upgrades
  • Pre-deployment verification for staging or production
  • Running full build → lint → test → security scan pipeline
  • Validating test coverage meets thresholds

Phase 1: Build

mvn -T 4 clean verify -DskipTests
# or
./gradlew clean assemble -x test

If build fails, stop and fix.

Phase 2: Static Analysis

Maven (common plugins):

mvn -T 4 spotbugs:check pmd:check checkstyle:check

Gradle (if configured):

./gradlew checkstyleMain pmdMain spotbugsMain

Phase 3: Tests + Coverage

mvn -T 4 test
mvn jacoco:report   # verify 80%+ coverage
# or
./gradlew test jacocoTestReport

Report:

  • Total tests, passed/failed
  • Coverage % (lines/branches)

Unit Tests

Test service logic in isolation with mocked dependencies:

@ExtendWith(MockitoExtension.class)
class UserServiceTest {

  @Mock private UserRepository userRepository;
  @InjectMocks private UserService userService;

  @Test
  void createUser_validInput_returnsUser() {
    var dto = new CreateUserDto("Alice", "alice@example.com");
    var expected = new User(1L, "Alice", "alice@example.com");
    when(userRepository.save(any(User.class))).thenReturn(expected);

    var result = userService.create(dto);

    assertThat(result.name()).isEqualTo("Alice");
    verify(userRepository).save(any(User.class));
  }

  @Test
  void createUser_duplicateEmail_throwsException() {
    var dto = new CreateUserDto("Alice", "existing@example.com");
    when(userRepository.existsByEmail(dto.email())).thenReturn(true);

    assertThatThrownBy(() -> userService.create(dto))
        .isInstanceOf(DuplicateEmailException.class);
  }
}

Integration Tests with Testcontainers

Test against a real database instead of H2:

@SpringBootTest
@Testcontainers
class UserRepositoryIntegrationTest {

  @Container
  static PostgreSQLContainer<?> postgres = new PostgreSQLContainer<>("postgres:16-alpine")
      .withDatabaseName("testdb");

  @DynamicPropertySource
  static void configureProperties(DynamicPropertyRegistry registry) {
    registry.add("spring.datasource.url", postgres::getJdbcUrl);
    registry.add("spring.datasource.username", postgres::getUsername);
    registry.add("spring.datasource.password", postgres::getPassword);
  }

  @Autowired private UserRepository userRepository;

  @Test
  void findByEmail_existingUser_returnsUser() {
    userRepository.save(new User("Alice", "alice@example.com"));

    var found = userRepository.findByEmail("alice@example.com");

    assertThat(found).isPresent();
    assertThat(found.get().getName()).isEqualTo("Alice");
  }
}

API Tests with MockMvc

Test controller layer with full Spring context:

@WebMvcTest(UserController.class)
class UserControllerTest {

  @Autowired private MockMvc mockMvc;
  @MockBean private UserService userService;

  @Test
  void createUser_validInput_returns201() throws Exception {
    var user = new UserDto(1L, "Alice", "alice@example.com");
    when(userService.create(any())).thenReturn(user);

    mockMvc.perform(post("/api/users")
            .contentType(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
            .content("""
                {"name": "Alice", "email": "alice@example.com"}
                """))
        .andExpect(status().isCreated())
        .andExpect(jsonPath("$.name").value("Alice"));
  }

  @Test
  void createUser_invalidEmail_returns400() throws Exception {
    mockMvc.perform(post("/api/users")
            .contentType(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
            .content("""
                {"name": "Alice", "email": "not-an-email"}
                """))
        .andExpect(status().isBadRequest());
  }
}

Phase 4: Security Scan

# Dependency CVEs
mvn org.owasp:dependency-check-maven:check
# or
./gradlew dependencyCheckAnalyze

# Secrets in source
grep -rn "password\s*=\s*\"" src/ --include="*.java" --include="*.yml" --include="*.properties"
grep -rn "sk-\|api_key\|secret" src/ --include="*.java" --include="*.yml"

# Secrets (git history)
git secrets --scan  # if configured

Common Security Findings

# Check for System.out.println (use logger instead)
grep -rn "System\.out\.print" src/main/ --include="*.java"

# Check for raw exception messages in responses
grep -rn "e\.getMessage()" src/main/ --include="*.java"

# Check for wildcard CORS
grep -rn "allowedOrigins.*\*" src/main/ --include="*.java"

Phase 5: Lint/Format (optional gate)

mvn spotless:apply   # if using Spotless plugin
./gradlew spotlessApply

Phase 6: Diff Review

git diff --stat
git diff

Checklist:

  • No debugging logs left (System.out, log.debug without guards)
  • Meaningful errors and HTTP statuses
  • Transactions and validation present where needed
  • Config changes documented

Output Template

VERIFICATION REPORT
===================
Build:     [PASS/FAIL]
Static:    [PASS/FAIL] (spotbugs/pmd/checkstyle)
Tests:     [PASS/FAIL] (X/Y passed, Z% coverage)
Security:  [PASS/FAIL] (CVE findings: N)
Diff:      [X files changed]

Overall:   [READY / NOT READY]

Issues to Fix:
1. ...
2. ...

Continuous Mode

  • Re-run phases on significant changes or every 30–60 minutes in long sessions
  • Keep a short loop: mvn -T 4 test + spotbugs for quick feedback

Remember: Fast feedback beats late surprises. Keep the gate strict—treat warnings as defects in production systems.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月16日 更新

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月16日 更新

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月16日 更新

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月16日 更新

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月16日 更新

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC28.3万2026年10月5日 更新

查看 affaan-m 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题