evandro/dev-workflows
1
0 Fork 0
Code Issues 2 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

chore(qa): replace the keyword-count harness with a structural lint and gate tests

Browse Source 
The old harness scored occurrences of words like VERIFICAR, so its score
measured wording, and it failed on a fresh clone. The lint checks frontmatter,
size limits, references and links; test_gate.py exercises the gate and hooks
on a throwaway repo; check_upstream.py flags vendored skills behind upstream.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>
This commit is contained in:
EvandroandClaude Opus 5.5 committed 2026-09-24 21:52:06 -03:00
1 parent 29b5ebf400
commit f77b0b440d
15 files changed
+560 -1549
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

No files matched your search

CONTRIBUTING.md
+17 -24
View File
@@ -1,36 +1,29 @@
# Contributing
Thanks for taking the time to contribute. This project is small, so keep it simple: open an issue to discuss first, then send a PR.
Open an issue to discuss first, then send a small, focused PR.
## What to improve
## Rules
Workflows, skills, or the QA harness. All changes should keep the same rules the workflows themselves enforce:
1. **Grounded.** Every claim in a workflow or README must trace back to a real repository fact. No fabricated commands, examples, or badges.
2. **Verifiable phases.** A phase is not done until it has a verification step (a command that proves the work). Add one if you touch a workflow.
3. **No AI-isms.** Docs and workflows must pass the avoid-ai-writing check (no em-dash runs, no "robust/seamless/leverage" filler).
## What not to change
- The QA harness must keep its meta-tests green. If you change scoring, re-run `qa/test_tests.py` and update `qa/snapshots/baseline-final.json`.
- Do not remove skills referenced by workflows without updating the workflows and `docs/SKILLS.md` together.
1. **Grounded.** Every command, path and claim in a skill or README traces to a real fact. No invented commands or badges.
2. **Short skills.** `SKILL.md` stays under 150 lines; details go to `references/` next to it.
3. **Proportional.** Each phase says from which tier it runs. Nothing is mandatory for every request unless it is cheap (the tier 0 gate).
4. **Checks are tools, not keyword counts.** A verification step runs something that can fail (tests, scanners, the gate). `grep -c` of a word proves nothing.
5. **No AI-isms** in docs and skills (no em-dash runs, no "robust/seamless/leverage").
6. **Vendored skills are copied 1:1** with their license, and recorded in `skills/NOTICE.md` (origin, commit, license).
## Local checks before a PR
```bash
cd qa
python3 wf_quality_harness.py # score must not drop below baseline
python3 test_quality.py # gates green
python3 test_tests.py # meta-tests green
python3 qa/lint_skills.py
python3 qa/test_gate.py
claude plugin validate --strict .claude-plugin/plugin.json
```
A new skill referenced by a workflow goes into its `metadata.dev-workflows.uses` (vendored) or
`external` (listed in `docs/SKILLS.md`); the lint checks both.
## Process
1. Fork the repo.
2. Create a branch: `git checkout -b feat/your-change`.
3. Make the change. Keep it small and focused.
4. Run the qa checks above.
5. Commit with a clear message.
6. Open a PR describing what changed and why.
Questions or ideas: open an issue.
1. Fork and branch: `git checkout -b feat/your-change`.
2. Make the change and run the checks above.
3. Open a PR saying what changed and why.