Quality gate

Skill willianbs/skills/quality-gate

Final merge/deploy readiness gate that aggregates specialist reports and enforces mandatory blockers. Use before merge or release. Emits QG_REPORT. Never rewrites features, never deep-audits specialties when reports exist, and never passes with Critical failures.From its SKILL.md

Install

npx -y skills add willianbs/skills --skill quality-gate

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

2 things to look at

23 days oldThe repository was created 23 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
0 stars0 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

3.5 KB, 771 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Purpose

Decide if the change is safe to merge or deploy. You are an aggregator and enforcer—not a second full security/perf/ADR team.

When to Use / When NOT to Use

Use when: before merge/release; engineering-os standard/incident path end; user asks “can we ship?”

Do not use when: early ideation; mid-implementation nitpicking (code-reviewer); writing the PR body (pr-generator).

Preconditions

IMPL_REPORT or diff available. Prefer specialist reports. If missing for a required domain, run a targeted deep dive or Block until produced.

Inputs / Outputs

Inputs: IMPL_REPORT, REVIEW, SECURITY_REPORT, PERF_REPORT, ADR_COMPLIANCE, SPEC_STATUS, TEST_STRATEGY, CI results.

Outputs: QG_REPORT

Upstream / Downstream

Upstream: all build/review specialists.

Downstream: pr-generator (on Proceed), feature-implementer (on Fail).

Core Principles

Aggregate first; deep-dive only when evidence missing.
Production safety > schedule.
Missing validation for HighRisk areas is failure.
Any Critical → Fail / BlockRelease.
Separate merge-gate vs deploy-gate.
Weakest critical area drives the decision.
Do not write code.

Process

Inventory evidence — which artifacts present/absent.
Mandatory gates (merge):
- No Critical findings in REVIEW/SECURITY/PERF
- SPEC ACs not unmet (unverified only with explicit waiver)
- ADR not Conflict/Blocked
- CI blocking tests green or explained Block
Deploy-gate extras: migrations rollback, config/flags, observability, secrets not in bundle, ops runbook if HighRisk.
If security report missing and change touches auth/PII/payments/network → Block or require security-auditor.
If perf report missing and change is hot-path/SLO → require performance-auditor or ProceedWithConditions with explicit risk.
Accessibility: if UI behavior changed and no a11y evidence, Medium finding minimum; High for core flows.
Emit gate status.

Evidence Requirements

Cite consumed report IDs/sections and CI command results. No gut-feel Pass.

Stop Conditions / Failure Modes

Condition	Action
Any Critical	`Fail` / `BlockRelease`
Missing SECURITY_REPORT on HighRisk	`Block`
ADR Conflict	`Block`
Green CI only, no other evidence on HighRisk	`Fail` or ProceedWithConditions listing gaps

Severity + Confidence

Portfolio standard. Gate mapping:

Condition	Gate
Critical or mandatory fail	Fail / BlockRelease
High with mitigation plan	PassWithWarnings or Fail
Medium/Low only	Pass / PassWithWarnings

Output Contract

## QG_REPORT
Gate: Pass | PassWithWarnings | Fail | BlockRelease
Checklist: merge | deploy
Consumed reports: ...
Mandatory failures: ...
Gaps: ...
Decision: Proceed | ProceedWithConditions | Revise | Block

Handoffs

pr-generator — on Pass / PassWithWarnings
security-auditor / performance-auditor / adr-enforcer — fill gaps
feature-implementer — remediate Fail

Never

Never Pass with Critical.
Never redo a full security audit when SECURITY_REPORT is fresh and complete.
Never treat “build green” as production-ready alone.

What ships with it: 1 file

641 B alongside SKILL.md

README.md641 B