Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

post-dev-verification(开发后验证)

post-dev-verification 用于补充开发相关能力,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要让 Agent 承接开发相关任务时使用。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。

post-dev-verification 是开发类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 8,422。

总安装 3,170周安装 127GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 1,026核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.1

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:post-dev-verification(开发后验证)
来源仓库:https://github.com/leonardo-lb/post-dev-verification
安装命令:
openclaw skills install post-dev-verification
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install post-dev-verification

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

用于开发完成后自动触发全栈验证流程,提升代码交付质量。适合在 OpenClaw 中集成单元测试、接口校验与部署前检查环节。通过 clawhub 安装后,可绑定 CI/CD 流程实现自动化验证。需确认测试覆盖范围与执行环境,防止跳过必要安全检测。建议结合项目实际需求调整验证策略,避免过度消耗资源。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install post-dev-verification;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

post-dev-verification 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install post-dev-verification。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

post-dev-verification 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

post-dev-verification 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

post-dev-verification 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

post-dev-verification 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 3,170 次,近一周安装 127 次,下载 1,026 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

post-dev-verification 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
post-dev-verification

开发后验证 · 本页

3,170—接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
post-dev-verification
description
>-
Covers
test design (MFT/INV/DIR taxonomy), quality metrics (4 layers, 15 metrics), feedback-driven fix loop,
metadata
requires
docker (optional), npm/pip/mvn/go (auto-detected), database client (optional)
capabilities
read_project_files, run_tests, start_stop_services, network_access
safety_isolation
Always run in a test/sandbox environment. Never use production credentials or production data.
safety_credentials
Uses only test accounts, test API keys, and environment-variable-sourced tokens. Never prompts for production secrets.
safety_side_effects
Starts/stops services, runs DB migrations, seeds test data, deletes test artifacts. All scoped to test environment.
safety_recommendation
Run Phase 0 (environment analysis) first to review what will be accessed before proceeding to execution phases.

Post-Development Verification

Automated full-stack quality verification after development. Real execution by default -- mock is the last resort. Deliverability is judged by external calls (HTTP requests, CLI invocations, browser interactions), not by internal function calls passing in isolation.

Core Philosophy: Real Execution First

Default realism level is L2: internal services run for real, only uncontrollable external dependencies (third-party APIs, paid services) may be mocked.

Downgrade signals (auto-detected from user intent):

  • "快速验证" / "只测逻辑" / "mock就行" -> L0
  • Pure function / utility library with no I/O -> L0
  • Local environment cannot start service -> L1 (report reason)
  • "生产级别" / "全面测试" / "验收测试" -> L3

Realism level definitions:

LevelDescriptionMock Ratio
L0All dependencies mocked100%
L1Core service real, databases mocked<=50%
L2Internal services real, external deps mocked<=30%
L3All services real (sandbox/test accounts)0%

Workflow

Execute phases sequentially. Each phase produces required artifacts for the next.

Phase 0: Environment Awareness
  v
Phase 1: Test Design (with anti-pattern scan)
  v
Phase 2: Execution & Evaluation
  v
Phase 3: Feedback & Fix Loop (if gates fail)
  v
Phase 4: Validation & Output

Safety Requirements

This skill starts services, runs migrations, and makes network calls. Before execution:

  1. Run in isolation -- use a test/sandbox environment, never production systems
  2. Use test credentials only -- test accounts, test API keys, environment-variable tokens; never supply production secrets
  3. Phase 0 first -- review the Environment Report before allowing execution phases (Phase 2+) to understand what will be accessed
  4. Scoped side effects -- all service starts, DB migrations, test data seeding, and cleanup are limited to the test environment
  5. User control -- the user can downgrade realism level (e.g., "快速验证" for L0) to reduce scope at any time

Phase 0: Environment Awareness

Gather project context and determine feasibility before designing tests.

0.1 Project Analysis

Identify:

  • Language & Framework: from config files (package.json, pyproject.toml, go.mod, etc.)
  • Project type: monorepo / microservice / full-stack / library / CLI tool
  • Monorepo scope (if applicable): identify which packages/services are affected by the current change
  • Test runner: detect existing test framework (pytest, vitest, jest, go test, etc.)
  • Coverage tool: detect coverage support (pytest-cov, vitest --coverage, nyc, etc.)
  • Build/start commands: from scripts, Docker configs, Makefiles

0.2 Dependency Mapping

For each dependency service, classify:

  • Controllable (self-hosted, has test env) -> must run real at L2+
  • Uncontrollable (third-party, paid, no sandbox) -> acceptable to mock

0.3 Realism Level Decision

  1. Check user intent signals -> override default if found
  2. Check test target type -> pure functions auto-downgrade to L0
  3. Assess local environment feasibility -> downgrade if services can't start
  4. Record decision with rationale in the environment report

0.4 Environment Feasibility Check

Verify:

  • Required tools installed (runtime, package manager, Docker if needed)
  • Dependency services available (databases, caches, message queues)
  • Target service can start locally
  • Environment consistency: Docker/config matches production; environment variables and config files are complete; dependency service versions align with deployment target

Output: Environment Report -- language, framework, test runner, realism level, service availability, any blockers, consistency gaps.


Phase 1: Test Design

Design test scenarios systematically using the test taxonomy. Do NOT write test code before completing analysis.

1.1 Pre-Analysis (Anti Leap-to-Code)

Before writing any test code, complete:

  • Code structure analysis: control flow, function signatures, module dependencies
  • Dependency analysis: external services, databases, API contracts involved
  • Constraint analysis: business rules, data invariants, input/output contracts
If test code references modules/imports not in the actual codebase -> hallucinated dependency. Remove and use actual project references.

1.2 Scenario Identification

Map each requirement to test scenarios:

  • Functional scenarios (one per acceptance criterion minimum)
  • Integration scenarios (cross-module, data flow, API contract)
  • Error/exception scenarios (all error handling branches)
  • End-to-end business flows (complete user journeys that traverse multiple steps/services -- e.g., "register -> verify email -> login -> place order -> pay -> receive confirmation"; "admin creates user -> assigns role -> user logs in with correct permissions"). Each identified critical business flow MUST have at least one E2E test validated through external calls.

Anti-pattern check: If >80% of scenarios are happy path -> Happy Path Obsession detected. Add error, boundary, and exception scenarios until >=30% target error scenarios.

1.3 Apply Test Taxonomy

For each scenario, apply the appropriate taxonomy category. Load detailed guidance from references/test-taxonomy.md when needed.

CategoryPurposeExample
MFT (Minimum Functionality)Verify each decision branch/leaf node worksEach code path returns correct result
INV (Invariance)Same logical request -> same result, different phrasings"show data" = "display info" = "list records"
DIR (Directional Expectation)Vary one input -> predict output directionLarger input -> larger output (monotonic)

Coverage rule: Each of the 3 categories MUST have >=1 test. Taxonomy coverage = 100% is a hard gate.

1.4 Boundary Value Coverage

For every input parameter, identify and cover:

  • Numeric: min-1, min, min+1, typical, max-1, max, max+1
  • String/Collection: empty, single item, typical, max, exceeds max, special chars, Unicode
  • Optional: not provided (default), explicit null/undefined, explicit empty

1.5 Real vs Mock Classification

Classify each scenario based on realism level:

  • L2+: Internal service interactions -> must run real
  • Any level: Uncontrollable external deps -> acceptable to mock (use realistic stubs)
  • Track: test realism ratio = real tests / total tests >= 70% (hard gate at L2)

1.6 Visible/Hidden Test Separation

After designing all scenarios:

  • Select 30-40% as hidden tests (prioritize edge cases, adversarial inputs, error scenarios)
  • Hidden tests are NOT exposed during fix loop -- reserved for Phase 4 validation
  • Record the split in the test plan

1.7 Anti-Pattern Scan

Run the pre-execution checklist. Load detailed guidance from references/anti-patterns.md when needed.

Anti-PatternCheckAction
Happy Path Obsession>80% scenarios are normal flowAdd error/boundary tests
Weak Assertionsassert(result != null), assert(status == 200) without bodyReplace with specific value checks
Leap-to-CodeTest code written before structure analysisRedo analysis first
Hallucinated DependenciesReferences non-existent modules/importsReplace with actual references
Missing TraceabilityGeneric test names (test_1, test_func)Rename to describe specific behavior

Rule: Each test name MUST describe the specific behavior being tested (e.g., test_submit_empty_form_returns_422). Each test MUST link to the requirement it validates.

Fix all detected anti-patterns before proceeding to Phase 2.

Phase 1 Output

  • Test plan with all scenarios (tagged: MFT/INV/DIR, real/mock, visible/hidden)
  • Boundary value coverage matrix
  • Anti-pattern scan results (all clear)

Phase 2: Execution & Evaluation

2.1 Environment Preparation

Start services in dependency order with health checks:

for each service in dependency_order:
    start service
    wait_for_health_check (port/ping/readiness endpoint)
    if health_check fails:
        report blocker, downgrade realism level

Prepare test data using project's existing seed/migration mechanisms when available.

System boot validation -- before running any tests, verify the system itself is deliverable:

  • The target service starts successfully from a clean state (no cached artifacts)
  • All health/readiness endpoints return healthy
  • Startup logs contain no ERROR-level entries (WARNs are logged for review)
  • Required configuration and environment variables are complete
  • If any boot validation fails -> this is a delivery blocker, report immediately

2.2 Test Execution

Run tests with coverage enabled. The test suite MUST include an E2E layer validated through external calls (HTTP requests to running services, CLI invocations, or browser interactions -- not internal function imports). Load execution templates from references/real-e2e-templates.md when designing this layer.

  • Detect and use the project's native test runner and coverage tool
  • Execute all visible tests (hidden tests reserved)
  • E2E layer: exercise all identified critical business flows through external interfaces. If the project exposes an HTTP API, at minimum send real HTTP requests to each endpoint. If CLI, invoke real commands. If UI, drive real browser interactions.
  • Capture: pass/fail per test, assertion output, error messages, coverage data

2.3 Metrics Collection

Compute all 4 layers of metrics. Load detailed definitions from references/metrics.md when needed.

Design Quality (computed after test design, before execution):

MetricFormulaThreshold
Scenario Coveragecovered requirements / total requirementsMUST = 100%
Taxonomy Coveragecategories with >=1 test / 3MUST = 100%
Boundary Value Coveragecovered boundary points / total identifiedSHOULD >= 90%
Data Feature Coveragecovered data dimensions / total identifiedSHOULD >= 85%

Execution Quality (computed after test run):

MetricFormulaThreshold
Pass Ratepassed tests / total testsSHOULD >= 95%
Code Coveragestatements covered / total statementsSHOULD >= 80%
Assertion Densitytotal assertions / total testsSHOULD >= 2.0
Weak Assertion Ratioweak assertions / total assertionsSHOULD <= 10%
Test Realism Ratioreal tests / total testsMUST >= 70%

Delivery Quality (computed from test results):

MetricFormulaThreshold
Expectation Match Ratefully matching tests / total tests (core: MUST 100%)Core: MUST=100%, Overall: SHOULD>=95%
Boundary Handling Ratepassing boundary tests / total boundary testsSHOULD >= 90%
Regression Safetystill-passing tests / previously-passing testsMUST = 100%
Business Flow CoverageE2E-verified business flows / total identified business flowsMUST = 100%

Iteration Efficiency (computed during fix loop):

MetricFormulaThreshold
Fix Convergence Ratenewly passing / previous failures<20% for 2 rounds -> STOP
Fix Introduction Ratenewly failing / total fix attempts>30% -> STOP

Phase 3: Feedback & Fix Loop

Triggered when hard gate metrics are not met.

3.1 Generate Feedback Report

Structure the report as JSON. Load schema from references/feedback-schema.md when needed.

Key sections:

  • round: current iteration number
  • project_context: language, framework, test runner, realism level
  • metrics: all 4 layers with pass/fail per metric
  • gate_result: "pass" | "fix_and_retry" | "stop_and_report"
  • failures_grouped: cluster by root cause, each with affected tests + fix direction
  • fix_history: timeline of each round's metrics before/after, fix description, newly passing/failing
  • hidden_tests: total count, run status, results (null during fix loop, populated in Phase 4)
  • anti_patterns_detected: names of anti-patterns found in current test suite
  • next_action: what the Agent should do next

3.2 Fix Prioritization

Address the largest failure cluster first (most affected tests) -- highest probability of improving overall pass rate.

3.3 Convergence Control -- Triple Exit Conditions

ConditionThresholdAction
Max iterations5 roundsStop, report current state
No convergence<20% convergence rate for 2 consecutive roundsStop, suggest fundamental issue
Regression>30% fix introduction rate in any roundStop, suggest wrong fix approach

3.4 Fix Loop Cycle

while round <= 5 AND not converged_stop AND not regression_stop:
    read feedback report -> identify largest failure cluster
    apply targeted fix to code/tests
    re-run full test suite (or failed-only if convergence is high)
    compute new metrics
    generate new feedback report
    check exit conditions
    record iteration in fix history

Phase 3 Output

  • Fix history timeline (round, metrics before/after, fix description, newly passing/failing)
  • Final feedback report with gate_result

Phase 4: Validation & Output

4.1 Hidden Test Validation

Run ALL hidden tests (not exposed during fix loop):

  • If hidden tests pass -> validates that fixes are genuine, not overfitted
  • If hidden tests fail -> report failures, do NOT re-enter fix loop

4.2 Quality Report

Generate final quality report:

  • Verdict: "PASS" (all hard gates met) or "FAIL" (hard gates not met) with specific reasons
  • All 4 layers of metrics with pass/fail status
  • Fix history timeline
  • Hidden test validation results
  • Anti-pattern scan summary
  • Recommendations for improvement

4.3 Reusable Test Scripts

Output test scripts that can run independently in CI/CD:

  • Follow project's native test format and directory conventions
  • Include run instructions: prerequisites, service startup, how to run, expected output
  • Include environment documentation: services needed, config required, ports

Quality Gate Quick Reference

Hard Gates (MUST pass -- blocks delivery)

MetricThreshold
Scenario Coverage= 100%
Taxonomy Coverage= 100%
Test Realism Ratio>= 70%
Expectation Match (core)= 100%
Regression Safety= 100%
Business Flow Coverage= 100%

Soft Targets (SHOULD pass -- reported, does not block unless configured)

MetricThreshold
Boundary Value Coverage>= 90%
Data Feature Coverage>= 85%
Pass Rate>= 95%
Code Coverage>= 80%
Assertion Density>= 2.0
Weak Assertion Ratio<= 10%
Boundary Handling Rate>= 90%

References

Load these files as needed during the workflow:

  • references/metrics.md -- Complete definitions for all 14 metrics: calculation formulas, threshold rationale, and what it means when a metric is not met. Load when computing or interpreting metrics.
  • references/test-taxonomy.md -- Detailed guidance for MFT/INV/DIR test categories with pseudocode examples, plus systematic boundary value analysis methods. Load during Phase 1 test design.
  • references/feedback-schema.md -- Full JSON Schema for feedback reports with a populated example. Load when generating feedback reports in Phase 3.
  • references/anti-patterns.md -- Detailed detection methods and fix strategies for all 5 anti-patterns: Happy Path Obsession, Weak Assertions, Leap-to-Code, Hallucinated Dependencies, Missing Traceability. Load during Phase 1 anti-pattern scan or Phase 3 feedback.
  • references/real-e2e-templates.md -- Environment preparation scripts and real E2E test templates for HTTP API, CLI tools, and Browser automation. Load during Phase 2 environment preparation and test execution.

平台分布

OpenClaw

87.32%
按下载量换算896

安全审计

VirusTotal

可疑

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills