test-driven-development
OBobra/superpowers298k2,631 new stars in the last 7 days
Gate a prompt universe for schema and provenance completeness, target or campaign contamination, evidence entailment, naturalness, one-concept clarity, architecture consistency, aided status, answer leakage, and semantic duplicates. Use after realistic prompt generation and before human panel selection.
Decide pass, revise, quarantine, or reject. Do not quietly repair upstream work.
This skill inherits the ethical floor from skills/ETHICS.md. It enforces anti-hallucination, provenance, blinding, and decay-aware review. Anti-spray and human-send are not applicable.
Require:
prompt_universe.json;prompt_architecture.json;Reject inputs that include baseline visibility, current rankings, target performance, answer-derived target pages, or selectors' preferred outcomes.
Check:
Deterministic target or campaign matches are hard failures in unaided core prompts. B0 target aliases pass only through a declared allowed exception. Embedding similarity may nominate a pair; it may never auto-delete.
For each candidate, judge:
Protect differences in locale, persona, material constraint, competitor-aided status, information act, journey, and expected answer. Merge only when the job, journey, constraints, and answer kind are materially the same.
Archive every removed variant with evidence and reason.
For health, legal, financial, safety, or other high-stakes domains, keep the prompt inside the measured navigation or information boundary. Quarantine prompts that ask the model to diagnose, determine personal suitability, prescribe, or make another professional judgment unless that judgment is explicitly in scope with qualified review. If a response may contain such advice, code it only under the declared answer-framing rubric; never score the advice as professionally correct without a separate validated protocol.
pass: supported, natural, correctly classified, uncontaminated, and not redundant.revise: wording can change without altering upstream facts or cell meaning; route the request to realistic-prompt-generation.quarantine: potentially useful but grade D, answer-derived, semantically suspicious, locale-unreviewed, or awaiting evidence/human decision.reject: contaminated, unsupported, materially leading, wrong cell, permission failure, or irreparable duplicate.QA must not:
Use:
target_terms:
brands: []
products: []
domains: []
people: []
slogans: []
proprietary_categories: []
campaign_terms: []
flattering_claims: []
competitor_terms: []
allowed_exceptions:
- band: B0_direct_brand_product
term_classes: [brands, products]
Run normalized, token, fuzzy, and semantic checks. Ordinary shared words may be legitimate; semantic flags require a recorded human or high-confidence review decision.
Give the human a Markdown QA report first:
Then write prompt_qa.json:
{
"schema_version": "1.0.0",
"artifact_id": "qa-<stable-slug>",
"created_at": "RFC3339",
"created_by": "declared agent or human",
"source_manifest_hash": null,
"warnings": ["hash_not_computed: compute source_manifest_hash before freeze"],
"baseline_fields_blinded": true,
"decisions": [
{
"candidate_id": "prompt-001a",
"status": "pass | revise | quarantine | reject",
"rule_results": [
{
"rule_id": "no-target-term-unaided",
"status": "pass | fail | review",
"evidence": []
}
],
"duplicate_decision": {
"canonical_cell_id": "cell-001",
"action": "retain_variant | merge_exact | merge_semantic | split"
},
"route_to": "realistic-prompt-generation | prompt-proximity-architecture | buyer-job-intent-analysis | human_gate_3 | null",
"reason": "Specific evidence-bound reason",
"review_confidence": "high | medium | low"
}
],
"accepted_candidate_ids": ["prompt-001a"],
"counts": {
"total_candidates": 1,
"pass": 1,
"revise": 0,
"quarantine": 0,
"reject": 0,
"accepted": 1
},
"gate_status": "ready_for_human_review | needs_revision | stop_permission_failure"
}
Keep every candidate, including rejected drafts, in prompt_universe.json. Emit exactly one decision for every universe candidate and no unknown decision IDs. Derive accepted_candidate_ids and counts from the final decision array in one pass: accepted IDs equal exactly the pass IDs, and every status count plus total_candidates must reconcile. If they do not, the output is invalid; recording the discrepancy in a warning or change ledger does not make it handoff-ready.
Human Gate 3 approves core/aided/campaign partitions and disputed decisions while still blind to baseline visibility. Pass only approved candidate IDs and the full rejection ledger to ai-visibility-panel-design.
OBobra/superpowers298k2,631 new stars in the last 7 days
MAmattpocock/skills288k10,178 new stars in the last 7 days
AFaffaan-m/ECC278k4,046 new stars in the last 7 days
Audit accessibility on Web, iOS, and Android to meet WCAG 2.2, with keyboard navigation and screen-reader support.
AFaffaan-m/ECC278k4,046 new stars in the last 7 days
AFaffaan-m/ECC278k4,046 new stars in the last 7 days
FIfirecrawl/firecrawl191k2,010 new stars in the last 7 days