Workbench review qa
Skill Fearvox/multica-ultimate-workbench/skills/workbench-review-qa
PASS, FLAG, and BLOCK review discipline for workflow review, QA verification, release checks, and issue closeout.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add Fearvox/multica-ultimate-workbench --skill workbench-review-qaAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 23 stars23 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
2.9 KB, 634 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Workbench Review QA
Use this skill for code review, workflow review, QA verification, release checks, and issue closeout.
Verdicts
PASS: objective is met and evidence is sufficient.FLAG: useful progress, but a non-blocking issue or missing evidence remains.BLOCK: objective is not met, unsafe, unverifiable, or materially wrong.
Review Method
- Identify the promised objective.
- Inspect the real output, diff, issue comments, runtime state, or checked-out repo.
- Compare evidence against the objective.
- Verify the smallest real path that proves the claim.
- Report findings first, ordered by severity.
- Check command syntax and live-resource ownership when the work involves Multica CLI mutations.
- If duplicate comments or artifacts exist, identify the primary artifact and explain why.
- For
GOAL_MODE: yesor/goalwork, compare the closeout against the locked objective and every required closeout gate.
Findings Format
For problems, return:
- severity,
- location or evidence,
- why it matters,
- required fix or next verification.
For clean reviews, return:
- verdict,
VERDICT_SUMMARY: three lines or fewer,- evidence checked,
- residual risk or test gap.
Every SDD review should include VERDICT_SUMMARY so the next agent can continue from the review header without re-reading the full review body.
Auto Review Sweeper
For automatic in_review handoffs, use this exact block on each reviewed target:
AUTO_REVIEW
TARGET: <identifier>
VERDICT: PASS | FLAG | BLOCK
VERDICT_SUMMARY: three lines or fewer
EVIDENCE: concrete issue/comment/run IDs, commands, or file paths checked
STATUS_ACTION: done | kept in_review | blocked | no_change
NEXT_ACTION: exact next owner/action, or none
PASSmay move the target issue todoneonly when the original goal is satisfied and no required follow-up remains.FLAGleaves the issue inin_reviewwith a bounded next action.BLOCKsets the issue toblockedwith blocking evidence.- If evidence is still arriving, leave the issue unchanged and mark it pending in the sweep summary.
QA Rules
- Do not accept
donebased on paraphrase alone. - Distinguish content failures from workflow/tooling failures.
- If repo access is needed, prefer the issue's project-bound GitHub repo resource and report the commit/branch inspected.
- For Goal Mode tasks,
PASSrequires evidence for the locked objective plus all relevant build/test/help-smoke/docs-or-report/git-status gates, or an explicit rationale for each non-applicable gate. - Treat
file://<LOCAL_WORKBENCH_REPO>as laptop-local fallback only; remote runtimes must flag it as invalid unless explicitly mounted. - Keep evidence concise and reproducible.
- Verify
Workbench Maxremains untouched when a task says it must be preserved.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.