Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索执行命令github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

prod-readinessprod readiness 搜索

Agent Skill

prod-readiness 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

259

周安装

11

GitHub Stars

11

下载量

91
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:prod-readiness(prod readiness 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/acedergren/agentic-tools
仓库路径:skills/prod-readiness
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/acedergren/agentic-tools --skill prod-readiness
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/acedergren/agentic-tools --skill prod-readiness

简介

用于查找、检索和筛选产品上线准备相关的资料与 checklist。

  • 适合在发布前验证功能、合规或运维条件时使用。
  • 通过 GitHub 安装,支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor 和 Gemini CLI 等宿主环境。
  • 使用时需明确产品阶段和关键验收标准。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围,防止访问未授权文档。

SKILL.md

Prod-Readiness

Spawns 5 specialist review agents in parallel, each writing findings to a dedicated report file. Synthesizes into a prioritized production readiness report with executive summary, blockers, and remediation plan.

Do NOT load when

  • user wants only one narrow review (use the relevant specialist skill instead)
  • codebase is mid-implementation with a knowingly broken baseline
  • task is to fix issues rather than assess readiness

NEVER

  • Never run on a dirty working tree — uncommitted changes mean agent findings don't map to a stable commit; findings become unreproducible and the report loses traceability
  • Never run on a failing baseline — a red test suite makes it impossible to distinguish pre-existing failures from review findings; always confirm baseline is green first
  • Never synthesize before all 5 agents finish writing — partial synthesis produces a report that omits entire dimensions; a CRITICAL finding from a slow agent gets buried in LOW backlog
  • Never let agents write to the same file — each agent has its own REVIEW_*.md; shared files produce interleaved, unparseable output
  • **Never commit REVIEW_*.md files from a previous run without clearing them** — stale findings from a prior session mixed with new ones produce a misleading severity distribution
  • Never rate an issue CRITICAL without a file:line reference — untraceable CRITICALs create review fatigue and get deprioritized the same as vague LOWs

Pre-flight (always run before spawning agents)

git status --short          # must be clean
git log --oneline -5        # confirm recent work is committed
npx vitest run --reporter=dot 2>&1 | tail -5  # must be green

If tests are failing: warn the user, do not proceed until baseline is green.

Agent specializations

Team name: prod-review-<YYYYMMDD>

Spawn all 5 in parallel via TeamCreate + Task.

AgentReport fileDomain
security-auditorREVIEW_SECURITY.mdOWASP Top 10, RBAC gaps, input validation, secrets, auth flows, webhook security
test-coverage-analystREVIEW_TESTING.mdUncovered critical paths, always-passing tests, missing error path tests, flaky patterns
performance-infraREVIEW_PERFORMANCE.mdN+1 queries, unbounded queries, missing indexes, memory leaks, graceful shutdown, rate limiting
observability-analystREVIEW_OBSERVABILITY.mdUnhandled rejections, PII in logs, error response consistency, structured logging, health endpoint
code-qualityREVIEW_QUALITY.mdDead code, circular deps, TODO/FIXME density, package boundary violations, type safety gaps

security-auditor prompt

Review this codebase for security vulnerabilities. Write ALL findings to REVIEW_SECURITY.md.

Check:
1. OWASP Top 10: injection, broken auth, IDOR, XSS, CSRF, misconfiguration
2. RBAC gaps: endpoints not protected by resolveOrgId() or permission checks
3. Input validation: user input reaching SQL without bind parameters
4. Secrets: hardcoded credentials, missing env var validation at startup
5. Dependency vulnerabilities: npm audit --json | jq '.vulnerabilities | length'
6. Auth flows: session fixation, token validation, logout behavior
7. Webhook security: HMAC validation, SSRF protection in isValidWebhookUrl()

Format findings as: [CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW] Description — File:Line — Suggested fix

test-coverage-analyst prompt

Analyze test coverage quality. Write ALL findings to REVIEW_TESTING.md.

Check:
1. Run: npx vitest run --reporter=json 2>/dev/null | jq '.testResults[].testFilePath' | wc -l
2. Critical paths with ZERO test coverage (routes, services, repositories)
3. Tests that always pass (vi.fn() calls with no assertions)
4. Missing error path tests (most routes only test happy path)
5. Flaky test patterns (time-dependent, missing afterEach cleanup)
6. Mock coverage: branches of mocked functions not tested

Format: [CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW] Area — Current coverage — Risk — Suggested tests

performance-infra prompt

Review performance and infrastructure readiness. Write ALL findings to REVIEW_PERFORMANCE.md.

Check:
1. N+1 queries (loops with SQL inside), missing indexes for frequent queries
2. Unbounded queries: SELECT without LIMIT
3. Memory: unclosed connections, event listeners without removeListener
4. Docker: resource limits in docker-compose.yml, health check configuration
5. Graceful shutdown: SIGTERM handling, connection drain
6. Rate limiting: all public endpoints covered
7. Caching: query results that could be cached

Format: [CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW] Issue — File:Line — Impact — Fix

observability-analyst prompt

Review error handling and observability completeness. Write ALL findings to REVIEW_OBSERVABILITY.md.

Check:
1. Unhandled rejections: async functions without try/catch in route handlers
2. Error boundaries: frontend error handling for route errors
3. PII in logs: user emails, tokens, or sensitive data in log statements
4. Error response consistency: all errors use the project's error hierarchy
5. Structured logging: all log calls use structured objects, not string concatenation
6. Error aggregation coverage: errors reaching the global handler vs. swallowed in try/catch
7. Health endpoint: does /health check critical dependencies (DB connection)?

Format: [CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW] Issue — File:Line — Risk — Fix

code-quality prompt

Review code quality and architecture health. Write ALL findings to REVIEW_QUALITY.md.

Check:
1. Dead code: exported functions never imported
2. Circular dependencies: run pnpm run check:circular if available
3. TODO/FIXME/HACK density: grep -rn "TODO\|FIXME\|HACK" apps/ packages/ --include="*.ts"
4. Package boundary violations: cross-app imports
5. Inconsistent patterns: code not following established conventions
6. Type safety gaps: any casts, @ts-ignore, non-null assertions (!) in production code

Format: [CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW] Issue — File:Line — Debt impact — Suggested refactor

Monitor agents

ls -la REVIEW_*.md   # confirm files being written
wc -l REVIEW_*.md    # track progress

If no file update from an agent in 2 minutes, send a check-in message.

Synthesize

Run after all 5 REVIEW_*.md exist. Use node scripts/summarize-review-reports.js or manually synthesize into PRODUCTION_READINESS_REPORT.md:

# Production Readiness Report — <date>

## Executive Summary
<1 paragraph: ship / don't ship with top 3 reasons>

## Quality Gate Results
- Tests: <pass/fail count>
- TypeScript: <clean / N errors>
- Lint: <clean / N warnings>

## Critical Blockers (fix before deploy)
## High Priority (fix within first sprint post-launch)
## Medium Priority (fix within first month)
## Low Priority / Tech Debt (backlog)

Each item: **[CATEGORY] Title** with File:Line, Risk, Effort (S/M/L), Fix.

Final quality gate

npx vitest run --reporter=dot 2>&1 | tail -10
cd apps/api && npx tsc --noEmit 2>&1 | tail -5
npm audit --audit-level=high 2>&1 | tail -10

Append results to report.

Commit and shutdown

git add REVIEW_*.md PRODUCTION_READINESS_REPORT.md
git commit -m "docs(review): production readiness report $(date +%Y-%m-%d)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>"

Shut down all agents, clean up team.

Arguments

  • (empty) — full review
  • --quick — skip performance and code-quality agents, focus on security and test coverage
  • --security-only — spawn only security-auditor
  • --no-commit — generate reports but don't commit

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

37.21%
按下载量换算34

Claude

31.21%
按下载量换算28

Cursor

17.77%
按下载量换算16

Gemini CLI

9.81%
按下载量换算9

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/acedergren/agentic-tools --skill prod-readiness 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills