mirror of
https://github.com/addyosmani/agent-skills.git
synced 2026-10-26 23:15:04 +00:00
Addy Osmani
127bd99d1f
Picking 'accessibility' returned a threshold and no mechanism, so the agent had to invent the setup and two agents would invent two different ones. That is the non-determinism the skill exists to remove. Adds a table mapping every dimension to the de facto tool, its install command, its run command, and what to gate on, across JS and Python. De facto matters here: these rule formats are what the ecosystem targets, so a team's existing config keeps working. Five failure modes called out. gitleaks needs --redact or the matched secret lands in the agent transcript. axe and Lighthouse need a running URL, and a project without one should drop the dimension rather than fake a check. Stryker and Semgrep scope to the diff or nobody runs them twice. Coverage reads the lcov the suite already wrote. CONSTRAINTS.md now carries the command next to each rule, so a dimension with a number and no command reads as the aspiration it is.
80 lines
3.3 KiB
JSON
80 lines
3.3 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"skill_name": "constraint-driven-development",
|
|
"trigger": {
|
|
"positive": [
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "Set up quality constraints for this project — I want to define our bar before the agent writes more code",
|
|
"top_k": 3
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "We have no written standards. Ask me what I care about and write it down with sane defaults",
|
|
"top_k": 3
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "The agent keeps adding @ts-ignore and skipping tests to get green. How do I stop that?",
|
|
"top_k": 3
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "What coverage threshold should we enforce, and where should it run so it doesn't slow us down?",
|
|
"top_k": 3
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "I care about accessibility and web performance — set those up as enforced constraints",
|
|
"top_k": 3
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"negative": [
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "Review this pull request across correctness and security",
|
|
"owner": "code-review-and-quality"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "Add a deploy stage to our pipeline with a manual approval gate",
|
|
"owner": "ci-cd-and-automation"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"prompt": "Write a failing test for this bug before we fix it",
|
|
"owner": "test-driven-development"
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"evals": [
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 1,
|
|
"kind": "dialogue",
|
|
"prompt": "Set up constraints for this repo. I don't really know what numbers to pick.",
|
|
"expected_output": "A short interview with defaults offered, followed by a CONSTRAINTS.md the user can explain",
|
|
"expectations": [
|
|
"The agent inspects the repo for stack, test runner, and existing linters before asking anything",
|
|
"No more than four questions are asked, and each one carries a usable default",
|
|
"When the user has no target number, the agent proposes recording today's value and holding it rather than inventing a threshold",
|
|
"The resulting constraints say where each check runs, keeping fast checks in the edit loop and slow checks later",
|
|
"Every number written down is accompanied by a reason"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 2,
|
|
"kind": "dialogue",
|
|
"prompt": "Our coverage is 62% and I want to enforce 85% starting today.",
|
|
"expected_output": "Pushback on setting an unmeetable budget, with the ratchet alternative offered",
|
|
"expectations": [
|
|
"The agent points out that a threshold the codebase fails today produces a permanently red build",
|
|
"It offers to record 62% and require that it not fall, as an adoptable alternative",
|
|
"It does not silently accept 85% without noting the consequence"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 3,
|
|
"kind": "dialogue",
|
|
"prompt": "Accessibility matters to us. Add it as a constraint.",
|
|
"expected_output": "A working accessibility check, not just a threshold written down",
|
|
"expectations": [
|
|
"The agent names axe-core and gives the install and run commands rather than only stating a violation threshold",
|
|
"It notes that axe needs a running URL and asks for one, or drops the dimension if the project has no URL to hit",
|
|
"The command that produces the verdict is recorded alongside the rule in CONSTRAINTS.md",
|
|
"The check is placed at the preview-deploy stage rather than in the per-edit loop"
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|