Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
How to work a production incident remediation task. Use when the task title starts with "Incident:" or its description carries an incident id and a suggest/auto_fix policy.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
A task titled Incident: … is a live production problem, assigned to you by the system. Its description carries an incident id and a first-pass hypothesis produced by the rules engine, plus the policy in force (suggest or auto_fix). That hypothesis is a starting point, not a verdict.
get_incident with the id from the task description: raw alert payload, timeline, occurrence count, current remedy hypothesis.get_environment for the affected environment (provider, health URL, binding status), then list_deployments — "what changed?" answers most incidents. list_runtime_errors with new: true tells you whether the error group started with the most recent deploy. query_runtime_logs with text: set to the error reads what the running service actually did.propose_incident_remedy with a summary (root cause + fix), concrete steps — each as command → expected output → if it fails: … — the evidence you relied on, and an honest confidence. Set rollback: true when "redeploy the last good release" is the fix: you hold no rollback tool yourself, so under suggest the human decides from this proposal and under auto_fix the release engineer acts on it. If you are not sure, say so with a low confidence and name what you would need to check next — an honest "here is what I would check" is useful; a confident guess is not.human_uat with no code change and say in your closing message that the remedy awaits a human decision.resolve_incident only after get_environment / list_runtime_errors show the environment is actually healthy again, with the note naming that evidence. Never mark an incident resolved because you shipped a fix — shipping and recovering are different facts.DB_MAX_CONNS to 40 in the prod config" is.まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when the diff adds or changes an endpoint, resolver, RPC, job or query that takes an object id, a role check, a request binding or a tenant filter - BOLA/IDOR, function-level authorization, mass assignment and tenant scoping
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use on every UI change - semantic HTML, labels for controls, keyboard-navigable dialogs/menus, visible focus, and never color as the only signal
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when a task changes any screen, form, dialog, menu or control - Lighthouse/axe scan of the changed screens, a keyboard walk, and the thresholds that fail a task
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when deciding whether a request needs an analiz task before implementation - the conditions that require the architect's analysis versus going straight to implementation
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。