协作头脑风暴
brainstorming
在实现前澄清需求、探索设计选择,并形成清晰的开发方向。
workflow-quality-gate【开发与工程】Pre-release quality gate across red-team, security, bundle size, performance, and unit tests. Use when "is this ready to ship?", "quality gate", or "pre-release checklist". Working tree to a PR → workflow-release-prep.
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
Degree of freedom: MIXED. Verdict and severity [HIGH freedom]; gate
order, Critical pause, and report table [LOW freedom — run exactly].
Run before any production release. Each skill contributes a specific defect class. The combined result is a single verdict.
Observe: red-team finds unauthenticated
/api/exportdump; bundle 180 KB; LCP 2.1s; tests green. Interpret: export is Critical (data leak); later gates cannot make this a GO. Classify: NO-GO — pause after Gate 1 and ask fix-now vs continue-and-report. Severity: Critical outranks a clean bundle; do not paper it as GO WITH CONDITIONS.
plan-security-audit, not audit-security fixesworkflow-release-prep; silent-bypass of CI → audit-gate-logic0. EXPLORE → test-exploratory (optional live probe: guest vs logged-in wander + diff)
1. RED-TEAM → test-red-team (adversarial: UX + pipeline + security + perf)
2. SECURITY → audit-security (static code review: OWASP, auth, RLS, secrets)
3. BUNDLE → audit-bundle-size (JS payload: lazy loading, tree-shaking, chunks)
4. PERFORMANCE→ audit-performance (Core Web Vitals, LCP, CLS, INP)
5. UNIT TESTS → test-unit (coverage gaps, regression suite green?)
Gate 0 is optional and does not replace Gate 1. Use it when the user asked to wander / monkey-test / compare guest vs logged-in first. Run gates in order — earlier gates often surface issues that make later gates redundant or change their scope.
Plan-only fork: if the user asked for a burndown and no code changes,
replace Gate 2 with plan-security-audit (and plan-rls-audit /
plan-secrets-audit when those are the symptom). audit-security may
fix inline; do not use it when the user said plan-only.
Read the
test-red-teamskill and follow it.
Output: coverage matrix + severity-ranked defect list.
Blocker for gates 2–5: if any Critical defect is found in Gate 1, pause and ask the user whether to fix it now or continue with the remaining gates. Critical defects must be resolved before the verdict can be GO.
Read the
audit-securityskill and follow it.
Focus on static code patterns missed by the live red team:
Read the
audit-bundle-sizeskill and follow it.
Threshold: first-load JS > 200 KB (gzip) is a Medium defect; > 400 KB is High.
Read the
audit-performanceskill and follow it.
Thresholds (Lighthouse mobile, simulated 4G):
Read the
test-unitskill and follow it.
Check: does the existing test suite pass? Are there obvious coverage gaps in the code path that was changed for this release?
## Quality Gate Report — [App] — [Date]
### Verdict: GO / NO-GO / GO WITH CONDITIONS
### Blockers (must fix before release)
| # | Gate | Finding | Severity | File | Fix |
|---|------|---------|----------|------|-----|
### Recommended (fix soon, not blockers)
| # | Gate | Finding | Severity |
|---|------|---------|----------|
### Passed
- Gate 1 (Red team): [N] defects, [N] Critical, [N] High
- Gate 2 (Security): clean / [N issues]
- Gate 3 (Bundle): [X KB] first-load JS
- Gate 4 (Performance): LCP [X]s, CLS [X], INP [X]ms
- Gate 5 (Unit tests): [pass/fail], coverage [X%]
GO = no Critical or High blockers, all gates passed GO WITH CONDITIONS = High defects present but agreed to fix post-release with a named owner + deadline NO-GO = any Critical defect, or 2+ High defects without mitigation plan
This skill runs the sweep. Whether those gates can be silently bypassed or
gamed is audit-gate-logic. Taking the local working tree to a merge-ready
PR is workflow-release-prep.