跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

broken-window-check

Before picking new work, smoke-test the last "completed" feature. If it's broken, revert and re-open it before touching anything else. Kills the "looks shipped, isn't shipped" bug across sessions.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md3.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Broken-Window Check

Across shift-notes-driven sessions (see shift-notes), agents will sometimes mark a feature complete after unit tests pass — even when the feature is end-to-end broken. The next session opens the repo, sees a green git log, and builds on top of a broken foundation. By the time anyone notices, three features are stacked on the crack.

The check: before picking new work, exercise the most recently "completed" feature end-to-end. If it fails, treat it as your only job this session.

The sequence — run in order, no skipping

  1. Read the last "done" entry in the shift notes / feature list (whichever the project uses).
  2. Drive the feature end-to-end using the actual runtime path — browser automation, HTTP request, CLI invocation. Not the unit test.
  3. Compare observed behavior to the spec — the steps field on the feature, or the acceptance criteria in the spec.
  4. If it works — proceed to normal work selection. Note the check in the shift notes ("verified feature N still green").
  5. If it fails —
    • git revert the commit that claimed completion (do not force-push).
    • Set that feature's status back to not-done in the feature list.
    • Note in shift notes: "reverted feature N, cause: <one line>".
    • Fix it. That is your entire session.

Do not pick new work on top of a broken previous feature. Ever.

What "end-to-end" means

The check must exercise the path the user actually takes. Anything less is theater.

Feature shapeValid checkInvalid check
Web UI buttonPuppeteer/Playwright click → observe DOMexpect(handler).toHaveBeenCalled()
HTTP endpointcurl the route → check status + bodyUnit test on the handler function
CLI flagInvoke the binary with the flag → observe outputImport the parser, assert on the AST
Background jobTrigger it → wait → assert side effectAssert the job function returns

Red flags — the check is not doing its job

  • You're reading tests instead of running the feature. Tests can pass while the feature is broken (wrong route, missing CORS, config mismatch). Drive the runtime.
  • You add a mock to make the check pass. The mock is the bug. Remove it, watch the failure, that's the real state.
  • You "fix" by editing the feature list to match reality ("oh it never supported X"). No. Revert. Re-open. Fix the code or negotiate scope in the spec, not the ledger.
  • You skip the check because "it worked yesterday". Yesterday's session doesn't run today's dev server.

Cost

The check is 30-90 seconds per session in a healthy project. In a project that's about to go sideways, it saves hours. The dropout in premature-completion rate is roughly 4x when the check is enforced vs. not (measured in shift-work-style agent runs).

Pairs with

  • shift-notes — the ledger the check reads and writes.
  • adversarial-verify — run this on the current session's diff before claiming done, so the next session doesn't have to broken-window you.
  • verification-before-completion — the general form of "don't claim without evidence".

If every session enforces the check, the compounding-error mode of shift-work agents stops compounding.

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

a11y-pass

免费

Catch the accessibility failures that ship in almost every AI-built UI. Use after building any interactive component.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

Before compaction Loopkit extracts decisions into claude-decisions.json (machine-readable). Read it alongside claude-progress.txt at session start — prose is for humans, JSON is for the loop.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

Review a diff against the goal spec assuming the code is BROKEN. The reviewer that lives in the maker's head always agrees with itself — this pulls review into a hostile, separate pass. Invoke after every code change before marking work done.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

Verify that an endpoint checks ownership, not just authentication. Use on any handler that reads or mutates user data.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

Find the exact commit that introduced a bug. Use when something worked before and broke, and you don't know which change did it.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

Turn a set of commits or a diff into a clean, user-facing changelog entry. Use before a release or PR description.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

Archive228/loopkit7552026年7月15日 更新

查看 Archive228 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题