跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

forensics-report

Use when a release review needs machine-derived evidence from git history — hotspot risk and change-coupling analyzers. Triggers on 'hotspot', 'what changes together', 'release forensics'.

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(2)

  • SKILL.md4.9 KB
  • evals/triggers.json1.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

forensics-report

When to use

  • Before or during a release review, when machine-derived evidence is wanted alongside the human review: "which files are the risk hotspots in this release", "what changes together", "release forensics".
  • When intended module boundaries should be checked against what the git history actually shows (change-coupling across module lines).
  • The output is advisory, never a gate — it points reviewers at places worth attention; it never passes or fails anything.
  • NOT for IT-security incident forensics (route to incident-commander) and NOT for runtime performance hotspots (route to performance-analysis).

Procedure

  1. Pick the range — the previous release tag to HEAD (vPREV..HEAD) or a released pair (vPREV..vNEW). Pin the range explicitly; a floating range breaks determinism.

  2. Run the report:

    npx tsx node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/forensics_report.ts --range vPREV..vNEW --out report.json
    

    Two deterministic, git-log-based analyzers run, read-only and offline:

    • Hotspot risk = normalized change frequency x normalized complexity per file over the range.
    • Change-coupling = co_changes(A,B) / min(changes(A), changes(B)) per file pair.
  3. Optionally feed the release findings ledger: add --findings-out findings.json, then ingest via

    npx tsx node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/check_finding_dispositions.ts --ingest findings.json --release X.Y.Z
    

    which appends to the existing ledger at agents/evidence/release-findings/<version>.json. Emitted findings are kind: correctness with severity: low|medium — non-blocking for the release gate by construction.

  4. Read the results:

    • hotspots[] — a hotspot is a place for reviewer attention, NEVER a quality verdict. A frequently changed complex file can be exactly right as it is; the score says "look here", not "this is bad".
    • coupling[] — file pairs that habitually change together.
    • boundary_contradictions[] — cross-module coupling above the threshold, i.e. a contradiction between intended and actual boundaries. This is a finding CLASS to discuss, not a failure.

Output format

  1. Lead with the scanned denominator (scanned.commits / scanned.files, including skipped bulk commits) — a reader must be able to judge the sample before the findings.
  2. Present hotspots and coupling as ranked tables with the score interpretation line ("a place to look, not a quality verdict") attached.
  3. When --findings-out was used, state the ingest command and the ledger path the findings landed in.

Deterministic JSON with these fields:

FieldMeaning
modeanalyzer mode the run used
rangethe pinned rev-range analyzed
scannedcommit/file counts, including skipped bulk commits
paramsthresholds and normalization parameters in effect
hotspots[]per-file hotspot entries (path, frequency, complexity, score)
coupling[]file-pair coupling entries (paths, co-change ratio)
boundary_contradictions[]cross-module coupling hits above threshold

Findings emitted via --findings-out conform to review-findings.schema.json (shipped with the package; kind: correctness, severity: low|medium).

Gotchas

  • Bulk commits are coupling noise — commits touching more than max_commit_files files (default 50) are skipped by the coupling analyzer and counted in the report's scanned section.
  • Only git log + working-tree file metrics are read — renamed files appear as two separate paths, splitting their history across both.
  • Deterministic only with a pinned range — vPREV..vNEW reproduces; "since today" or a date-relative range does not.

Do NOT

  • Do NOT build a gate out of this report — the pre-registered value question in docs/CLAIMS.md (forensics-pack-value) decides promotion or closure; until then the output stays advisory.
  • Do NOT sell hotspot scores as a code-quality proxy — they measure change frequency and complexity, not correctness or craftsmanship.
  • Do NOT emit findings with severity: high|critical or kind: security|claim — that would block the release gate, which this analyzer must never do.

See also

  • forensics_report.ts (this package's scripts tree; consumer path node_modules/@event4u/agent-config/src/scripts/forensics_report.ts) — the analyzer implementation.
  • docs/CLAIMS.md — the pre-registered forensics-pack-value question.

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

Use when reviewing UI for accessibility — WCAG 2.2 AA, keyboard nav, focus, ARIA, contrast, screen-reader semantics — even on 'is this a11y-OK?' or 'mach das barrierefrei'.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

Use when defining or auditing the activation event — aha-moment selection, retention correlation, falsifiable definition. Triggers on 'what is our aha moment', 'redefine activation'.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

Use when capturing an architectural decision — file naming, next ADR number, Status / Context / Decision / Consequences, index regen; fires even without saying 'ADR'.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

Adversarial critique — devil's advocate, stress-test, honest teardown ('poke holes', 'be brutal', 'was hältst du davon'); explicit request only. Routine code or design review → code-review.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

Use when reading, creating, or updating agent documentation, module docs, roadmaps, or AGENTS.md. Understands the full .augment/, agents/, and copilot-instructions structure.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

Use for an adversarial red-team / blue-team / auditor review of an AI agent's CONFIG + behaviour (rules, skills, MCP, hooks, permissions) — attack-chain → defensive-gap list, not a code audit.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

event4u-app/agent-config132026年10月22日 更新

查看 event4u-app 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题