feat: add new skills for coding standards, continuous learning, detail layout, form layout, project guidelines, security review, and verification loop
- Introduced coding standards for TypeScript and React in SKILL.md. - Added continuous learning skill with configuration and evaluation scripts. - Created detail layout guidelines for read-only pages. - Established form layout rules for data-entry forms. - Documented project guidelines for the frontend monorepo. - Implemented security review checklist for frontend/Electron applications. - Developed a verification loop skill for comprehensive session checks. This commit enhances the skill set available for developers, ensuring adherence to best practices and improving code quality.
This commit is contained in:
shancheas
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
|
||||
# Build and Fix
|
||||
|
||||
Incrementally fix TypeScript and build errors:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `pnpm typecheck` or `pnpm build` (this repo uses pnpm + Turbo + Vite)
|
||||
|
||||
2. Parse error output:
|
||||
- Group by file
|
||||
- Sort by severity
|
||||
|
||||
3. For each error:
|
||||
- Show 5 lines of context
|
||||
- Explain the issue
|
||||
- Apply a minimal fix
|
||||
- Re-run the failing command
|
||||
|
||||
4. Stop if:
|
||||
- The fix introduces new errors
|
||||
- The same error persists after 3 attempts
|
||||
- The user asks to pause
|
||||
|
||||
5. Show summary of fixed / remaining / new errors
|
||||
|
||||
Fix one error at a time. Do not refactor. Invoke **build-error-resolver** when useful.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
|
||||
# Checkpoint Command
|
||||
|
||||
Create or verify a checkpoint in your workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
`/checkpoint [create|verify|list] [name]`
|
||||
|
||||
## Create Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
When creating a checkpoint:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `/verify quick` to ensure current state is clean
|
||||
2. Create a git stash or commit with checkpoint name
|
||||
3. Log checkpoint to `.cursor/checkpoints.log`:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
echo "$(date +%Y-%m-%d-%H:%M) | $CHECKPOINT_NAME | $(git rev-parse --short HEAD)" >> .cursor/checkpoints.log
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. Report checkpoint created
|
||||
|
||||
## Verify Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
When verifying against a checkpoint:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read checkpoint from log
|
||||
2. Compare current state to checkpoint:
|
||||
- Files added since checkpoint
|
||||
- Files modified since checkpoint
|
||||
- Test pass rate now vs then
|
||||
- Coverage now vs then
|
||||
|
||||
3. Report:
|
||||
```
|
||||
CHECKPOINT COMPARISON: $NAME
|
||||
============================
|
||||
Files changed: X
|
||||
Tests: +Y passed / -Z failed
|
||||
Coverage: +X% / -Y%
|
||||
Build: [PASS/FAIL]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## List Checkpoints
|
||||
|
||||
Show all checkpoints with:
|
||||
- Name
|
||||
- Timestamp
|
||||
- Git SHA
|
||||
- Status (current, behind, ahead)
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
Typical checkpoint flow:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
[Start] --> /checkpoint create "feature-start"
|
||||
|
|
||||
[Implement] --> /checkpoint create "core-done"
|
||||
|
|
||||
[Test] --> /checkpoint verify "core-done"
|
||||
|
|
||||
[Refactor] --> /checkpoint create "refactor-done"
|
||||
|
|
||||
[PR] --> /checkpoint verify "feature-start"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
$ARGUMENTS:
|
||||
- `create <name>` - Create named checkpoint
|
||||
- `verify <name>` - Verify against named checkpoint
|
||||
- `list` - Show all checkpoints
|
||||
- `clear` - Remove old checkpoints (keeps last 5)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
||||
# Code Review
|
||||
|
||||
Comprehensive security and quality review of uncommitted changes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Get changed files: git diff --name-only HEAD
|
||||
|
||||
2. For each changed file, check for:
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Issues (CRITICAL):**
|
||||
- Hardcoded credentials, API keys, tokens
|
||||
- SQL injection vulnerabilities
|
||||
- XSS vulnerabilities
|
||||
- Missing input validation
|
||||
- Insecure dependencies
|
||||
- Path traversal risks
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Quality (HIGH):**
|
||||
- Functions > 50 lines
|
||||
- Files > 800 lines
|
||||
- Nesting depth > 4 levels
|
||||
- Missing error handling
|
||||
- console.log statements
|
||||
- TODO/FIXME comments
|
||||
- Missing JSDoc for public APIs
|
||||
|
||||
**Best Practices (MEDIUM):**
|
||||
- Mutation patterns (use immutable instead)
|
||||
- Emoji usage in code/comments
|
||||
- Missing tests for new code
|
||||
- Accessibility issues (a11y)
|
||||
|
||||
3. Generate report with:
|
||||
- Severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW
|
||||
- File location and line numbers
|
||||
- Issue description
|
||||
- Suggested fix
|
||||
|
||||
4. Block commit if CRITICAL or HIGH issues found
|
||||
|
||||
Never approve code with security vulnerabilities!
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Generate and run frontend journey tests with Vitest/Testing Library, plus browser verification for apps/web. Covers login and FULL_PAGE index/form/detail.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# E2E / Journey Command
|
||||
|
||||
This command invokes the **e2e-runner** agent to cover critical UI journeys. There is no NestJS or Playwright suite.
|
||||
|
||||
## What This Command Does
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Identify journeys** — login, FULL_PAGE index / form / detail
|
||||
2. **Write or update Vitest tests** — mock `@repo/core-api` services
|
||||
3. **Run** `pnpm test` (or `pnpm --filter web test`)
|
||||
4. **Browser-verify** `apps/web` when the change is routing or layout
|
||||
5. **Report** pass/fail
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
Use `/e2e` when:
|
||||
|
||||
- Testing login or a FULL_PAGE module flow
|
||||
- Verifying index → form → detail navigation
|
||||
- Checking empty / error states after a UI change
|
||||
- Preparing a PR that touches routing or providers
|
||||
|
||||
## How It Works
|
||||
|
||||
The e2e-runner agent will:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Copy patterns from `apps/web/src/apps/main/modules/example/full-page/`
|
||||
2. Mock `fullPageDataService` (or the module's factory) — not a database
|
||||
3. Run `pnpm test`
|
||||
4. Drive the browser for layout/routing if needed (`pnpm dev:web`)
|
||||
5. Summarize failures
|
||||
|
||||
## Example
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: /e2e Test the example full-page index and detail flow
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Canonical sample: `example/full-page`. Do not invent a third page style. Do not add Playwright unless asked.
|
||||
|
||||
## Related
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: `.cursor/agents/e2e-runner.md`
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
|
||||
# Eval Command
|
||||
|
||||
Manage eval-driven development workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
`/eval [define|check|report|list] [feature-name]`
|
||||
|
||||
## Define Evals
|
||||
|
||||
`/eval define feature-name`
|
||||
|
||||
Create a new eval definition:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create `.cursor/evals/feature-name.md` with template:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## EVAL: feature-name
|
||||
Created: $(date)
|
||||
|
||||
### Capability Evals
|
||||
- [ ] [Description of capability 1]
|
||||
- [ ] [Description of capability 2]
|
||||
|
||||
### Regression Evals
|
||||
- [ ] [Existing behavior 1 still works]
|
||||
- [ ] [Existing behavior 2 still works]
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Criteria
|
||||
- pass@3 > 90% for capability evals
|
||||
- pass^3 = 100% for regression evals
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Prompt user to fill in specific criteria
|
||||
|
||||
## Check Evals
|
||||
|
||||
`/eval check feature-name`
|
||||
|
||||
Run evals for a feature:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read eval definition from `.cursor/evals/feature-name.md`
|
||||
2. For each capability eval:
|
||||
- Attempt to verify criterion
|
||||
- Record PASS/FAIL
|
||||
- Log attempt in `.cursor/evals/feature-name.log`
|
||||
3. For each regression eval:
|
||||
- Run relevant tests
|
||||
- Compare against baseline
|
||||
- Record PASS/FAIL
|
||||
4. Report current status:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
EVAL CHECK: feature-name
|
||||
========================
|
||||
Capability: X/Y passing
|
||||
Regression: X/Y passing
|
||||
Status: IN PROGRESS / READY
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Report Evals
|
||||
|
||||
`/eval report feature-name`
|
||||
|
||||
Generate comprehensive eval report:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
EVAL REPORT: feature-name
|
||||
=========================
|
||||
Generated: $(date)
|
||||
|
||||
CAPABILITY EVALS
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
[eval-1]: PASS (pass@1)
|
||||
[eval-2]: PASS (pass@2) - required retry
|
||||
[eval-3]: FAIL - see notes
|
||||
|
||||
REGRESSION EVALS
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
[test-1]: PASS
|
||||
[test-2]: PASS
|
||||
[test-3]: PASS
|
||||
|
||||
METRICS
|
||||
-------
|
||||
Capability pass@1: 67%
|
||||
Capability pass@3: 100%
|
||||
Regression pass^3: 100%
|
||||
|
||||
NOTES
|
||||
-----
|
||||
[Any issues, edge cases, or observations]
|
||||
|
||||
RECOMMENDATION
|
||||
--------------
|
||||
[SHIP / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## List Evals
|
||||
|
||||
`/eval list`
|
||||
|
||||
Show all eval definitions:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
EVAL DEFINITIONS
|
||||
================
|
||||
feature-auth [3/5 passing] IN PROGRESS
|
||||
feature-search [5/5 passing] READY
|
||||
feature-export [0/4 passing] NOT STARTED
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
$ARGUMENTS:
|
||||
- `define <name>` - Create new eval definition
|
||||
- `check <name>` - Run and check evals
|
||||
- `report <name>` - Generate full report
|
||||
- `list` - Show all evals
|
||||
- `clean` - Remove old eval logs (keeps last 10 runs)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
|
||||
# /learn - Extract Reusable Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
Analyze the current session and extract any patterns worth saving as skills.
|
||||
|
||||
## Trigger
|
||||
|
||||
Run `/learn` at any point during a session when you've solved a non-trivial problem.
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Extract
|
||||
|
||||
Look for:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Error Resolution Patterns**
|
||||
- What error occurred?
|
||||
- What was the root cause?
|
||||
- What fixed it?
|
||||
- Is this reusable for similar errors?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Debugging Techniques**
|
||||
- Non-obvious debugging steps
|
||||
- Tool combinations that worked
|
||||
- Diagnostic patterns
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Workarounds**
|
||||
- Library quirks
|
||||
- API limitations
|
||||
- Version-specific fixes
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Project-Specific Patterns**
|
||||
- Codebase conventions discovered
|
||||
- Architecture decisions made
|
||||
- Integration patterns
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
Create a skill file at `.agents/skills/learned/[pattern-name].md`:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Descriptive Pattern Name]
|
||||
|
||||
**Extracted:** [Date]
|
||||
**Context:** [Brief description of when this applies]
|
||||
|
||||
## Problem
|
||||
[What problem this solves - be specific]
|
||||
|
||||
## Solution
|
||||
[The pattern/technique/workaround]
|
||||
|
||||
## Example
|
||||
[Code example if applicable]
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
[Trigger conditions - what should activate this skill]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Process
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review the session for extractable patterns
|
||||
2. Identify the most valuable/reusable insight
|
||||
3. Draft the skill file
|
||||
4. Ask user to confirm before saving
|
||||
5. Save to `.agents/skills/learned/`
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Don't extract trivial fixes (typos, simple syntax errors)
|
||||
- Don't extract one-time issues (specific API outages, etc.)
|
||||
- Focus on patterns that will save time in future sessions
|
||||
- Keep skills focused - one pattern per skill
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
|
||||
# Orchestrate Command
|
||||
|
||||
Sequential agent workflow for complex tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
`/orchestrate [workflow-type] [task-description]`
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Types
|
||||
|
||||
### feature
|
||||
Full feature implementation workflow:
|
||||
```
|
||||
planner -> tdd-guide -> code-reviewer -> security-reviewer
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### bugfix
|
||||
Bug investigation and fix workflow:
|
||||
```
|
||||
explorer -> tdd-guide -> code-reviewer
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### refactor
|
||||
Safe refactoring workflow:
|
||||
```
|
||||
architect -> code-reviewer -> tdd-guide
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### security
|
||||
Security-focused review:
|
||||
```
|
||||
security-reviewer -> code-reviewer -> architect
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
For each agent in the workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Invoke agent** with context from previous agent
|
||||
2. **Collect output** as structured handoff document
|
||||
3. **Pass to next agent** in chain
|
||||
4. **Aggregate results** into final report
|
||||
|
||||
## Handoff Document Format
|
||||
|
||||
Between agents, create handoff document:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## HANDOFF: [previous-agent] -> [next-agent]
|
||||
|
||||
### Context
|
||||
[Summary of what was done]
|
||||
|
||||
### Findings
|
||||
[Key discoveries or decisions]
|
||||
|
||||
### Files Modified
|
||||
[List of files touched]
|
||||
|
||||
### Open Questions
|
||||
[Unresolved items for next agent]
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
[Suggested next steps]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Example: Feature Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
/orchestrate feature "Add user authentication"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Executes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Planner Agent**
|
||||
- Analyzes requirements
|
||||
- Creates implementation plan
|
||||
- Identifies dependencies
|
||||
- Output: `HANDOFF: planner -> tdd-guide`
|
||||
|
||||
2. **TDD Guide Agent**
|
||||
- Reads planner handoff
|
||||
- Writes tests first
|
||||
- Implements to pass tests
|
||||
- Output: `HANDOFF: tdd-guide -> code-reviewer`
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Code Reviewer Agent**
|
||||
- Reviews implementation
|
||||
- Checks for issues
|
||||
- Suggests improvements
|
||||
- Output: `HANDOFF: code-reviewer -> security-reviewer`
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Security Reviewer Agent**
|
||||
- Security audit
|
||||
- Vulnerability check
|
||||
- Final approval
|
||||
- Output: Final Report
|
||||
|
||||
## Final Report Format
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
ORCHESTRATION REPORT
|
||||
====================
|
||||
Workflow: feature
|
||||
Task: Add user authentication
|
||||
Agents: planner -> tdd-guide -> code-reviewer -> security-reviewer
|
||||
|
||||
SUMMARY
|
||||
-------
|
||||
[One paragraph summary]
|
||||
|
||||
AGENT OUTPUTS
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
Planner: [summary]
|
||||
TDD Guide: [summary]
|
||||
Code Reviewer: [summary]
|
||||
Security Reviewer: [summary]
|
||||
|
||||
FILES CHANGED
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
[List all files modified]
|
||||
|
||||
TEST RESULTS
|
||||
------------
|
||||
[Test pass/fail summary]
|
||||
|
||||
SECURITY STATUS
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
[Security findings]
|
||||
|
||||
RECOMMENDATION
|
||||
--------------
|
||||
[SHIP / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Parallel Execution
|
||||
|
||||
For independent checks, run agents in parallel:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
### Parallel Phase
|
||||
Run simultaneously:
|
||||
- code-reviewer (quality)
|
||||
- security-reviewer (security)
|
||||
- architect (design)
|
||||
|
||||
### Merge Results
|
||||
Combine outputs into single report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
$ARGUMENTS:
|
||||
- `feature <description>` - Full feature workflow
|
||||
- `bugfix <description>` - Bug fix workflow
|
||||
- `refactor <description>` - Refactoring workflow
|
||||
- `security <description>` - Security review workflow
|
||||
- `custom <agents> <description>` - Custom agent sequence
|
||||
|
||||
## Custom Workflow Example
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
/orchestrate custom "architect,tdd-guide,code-reviewer" "Redesign caching layer"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start with planner** for complex features
|
||||
2. **Always include code-reviewer** before merge
|
||||
3. **Use security-reviewer** for auth/payment/PII
|
||||
4. **Keep handoffs concise** - focus on what next agent needs
|
||||
5. **Run verification** between agents if needed
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Restate requirements, assess risks, and create step-by-step implementation plan. WAIT for user CONFIRM before touching any code.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Plan Command
|
||||
|
||||
This command invokes the **planner** agent to create a comprehensive implementation plan before writing any code.
|
||||
|
||||
## What This Command Does
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Restate Requirements** - Clarify what needs to be built
|
||||
2. **Identify Risks** - Surface potential issues and blockers
|
||||
3. **Create Step Plan** - Break down implementation into phases
|
||||
4. **Wait for Confirmation** - MUST receive user approval before proceeding
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
Use `/plan` when:
|
||||
- Starting a new feature
|
||||
- Making significant architectural changes
|
||||
- Working on complex refactoring
|
||||
- Multiple files/components will be affected
|
||||
- Requirements are unclear or ambiguous
|
||||
|
||||
## How It Works
|
||||
|
||||
The planner agent will:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Analyze the request** and restate requirements in clear terms
|
||||
2. **Break down into phases** with specific, actionable steps
|
||||
3. **Identify dependencies** between components
|
||||
4. **Assess risks** and potential blockers
|
||||
5. **Estimate complexity** (High/Medium/Low)
|
||||
6. **Present the plan** and WAIT for your explicit confirmation
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Usage
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: /plan Add a FULL_PAGE master-data module for vehicle types, same as example/full-page
|
||||
|
||||
Agent (planner):
|
||||
# Implementation Plan: Vehicle Types FULL_PAGE module
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements Restatement
|
||||
- New authenticated module under apps/web
|
||||
- Index, form (create/edit/duplicate), and detail pages
|
||||
- Copy example/full-page layout and wiring
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Domain + data
|
||||
- ModuleConfigEntity, entity, Zod validator (createFullPageSchema pattern)
|
||||
- Remote data service via apiClient + CommonRemoteDataServices
|
||||
- Transformer DTO ↔ entity
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Presentation
|
||||
- presentation/factory with EnterpriseModuleProvider + registerModuleNamespace
|
||||
- Index / form / detail pages using Enterprise* providers
|
||||
- Field* form fields and detail-layout skill
|
||||
- Menu + lazy route registration
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Tests
|
||||
- Vitest for validator and transformer
|
||||
- Browser-verify index → form → detail
|
||||
|
||||
## Dependencies
|
||||
- @repo/ui foundations and form fields
|
||||
- @repo/core-api CommonRemoteDataServices
|
||||
- Backend API already exposing the resource (out of scope)
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks
|
||||
- MEDIUM: i18n namespace mismatch
|
||||
- LOW: Copying the sample and leaving EXAMPLE_FULL_PAGE keys
|
||||
|
||||
## Estimated Complexity: MEDIUM
|
||||
|
||||
**WAITING FOR CONFIRMATION**: Proceed with this plan? (yes/no/modify)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Notes
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL**: The planner agent will **NOT** write any code until you explicitly confirm the plan with "yes" or "proceed" or similar affirmative response.
|
||||
|
||||
If you want changes, respond with:
|
||||
- "modify: [your changes]"
|
||||
- "different approach: [alternative]"
|
||||
- "skip phase 2 and do phase 3 first"
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Commands
|
||||
|
||||
After planning:
|
||||
- Use `/tdd` to implement with test-driven development
|
||||
- Use `/build-and-fix` if build errors occur
|
||||
- Use `/code-review` to review completed implementation
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Agents
|
||||
|
||||
This command invokes the `planner` agent located at:
|
||||
`.cursor/agents/planner.md`
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
|
||||
# Refactor Clean
|
||||
|
||||
Safely identify and remove dead code with test verification:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run dead code analysis tools:
|
||||
- knip: Find unused exports and files
|
||||
- depcheck: Find unused dependencies
|
||||
- ts-prune: Find unused TypeScript exports
|
||||
|
||||
2. Generate comprehensive report in .reports/dead-code-analysis.md
|
||||
|
||||
3. Categorize findings by severity:
|
||||
- SAFE: Test files, unused utilities
|
||||
- CAUTION: API routes, components
|
||||
- DANGER: Config files, main entry points
|
||||
|
||||
4. Propose safe deletions only
|
||||
|
||||
5. Before each deletion:
|
||||
- Run full test suite
|
||||
- Verify tests pass
|
||||
- Apply change
|
||||
- Re-run tests
|
||||
- Rollback if tests fail
|
||||
|
||||
6. Show summary of cleaned items
|
||||
|
||||
Never delete code without running tests first!
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Configure your preferred package manager (npm/pnpm/yarn/bun)
|
||||
disable-model-invocation: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Package Manager Setup
|
||||
|
||||
Configure your preferred package manager for this project or globally.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Detect current package manager
|
||||
node scripts/setup-package-manager.js --detect
|
||||
|
||||
# Set global preference
|
||||
node scripts/setup-package-manager.js --global pnpm
|
||||
|
||||
# Set project preference
|
||||
node scripts/setup-package-manager.js --project bun
|
||||
|
||||
# List available package managers
|
||||
node scripts/setup-package-manager.js --list
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Detection Priority
|
||||
|
||||
When determining which package manager to use, the following order is checked:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Environment variable**: `CURSOR_PACKAGE_MANAGER`
|
||||
2. **Project config**: `.cursor/package-manager.json`
|
||||
3. **package.json**: `packageManager` field
|
||||
4. **Lock file**: Presence of package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, or bun.lockb
|
||||
5. **Global config**: `~/.cursor/package-manager.json`
|
||||
6. **Fallback**: First available package manager (pnpm > bun > yarn > npm)
|
||||
|
||||
## Configuration Files
|
||||
|
||||
### Global Configuration
|
||||
```json
|
||||
// ~/.cursor/package-manager.json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"packageManager": "pnpm"
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Project Configuration
|
||||
```json
|
||||
// .cursor/package-manager.json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"packageManager": "bun"
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### package.json
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"packageManager": "pnpm@8.6.0"
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Environment Variable
|
||||
|
||||
Set `CURSOR_PACKAGE_MANAGER` to override all other detection methods:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
$env:CURSOR_PACKAGE_MANAGER = "pnpm"
|
||||
|
||||
# macOS/Linux
|
||||
export CURSOR_PACKAGE_MANAGER=pnpm
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Run the Detection
|
||||
|
||||
To see current package manager detection results, run:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
node scripts/setup-package-manager.js --detect
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Enforce test-driven development. Scaffold types, write Vitest tests FIRST, then implement the minimum to pass. Ensure 80%+ coverage.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# TDD Command
|
||||
|
||||
This command invokes the **tdd-guide** agent.
|
||||
|
||||
## What This Command Does
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Scaffold types** — inputs/outputs first
|
||||
2. **Write failing tests** (RED) with Vitest
|
||||
3. **Implement the minimum** (GREEN)
|
||||
4. **Refactor** while green
|
||||
5. **Check coverage** (80%+)
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- New validators, transformers, stores, components
|
||||
- Bug fixes (reproducing test first)
|
||||
- Refactors of existing logic
|
||||
|
||||
## Cycle
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
RED → GREEN → REFACTOR → REPEAT
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Example
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: /tdd Add validation for the full-page name field
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// full-page.validator.test.ts
|
||||
import { createFullPageSchema } from './full-page.validator'
|
||||
|
||||
it('rejects an empty name', () => {
|
||||
const schema = createFullPageSchema((k) => k)
|
||||
expect(schema.safeParse({ code: 'ABC', name: '' }).success).toBe(false)
|
||||
})
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
pnpm --filter web test
|
||||
pnpm test
|
||||
pnpm check:all
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Mock `@repo/core-api` / `apiClient`, not a database. UI in `packages/ui` uses Testing Library.
|
||||
|
||||
## Related
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: `.cursor/agents/tdd-guide.md`
|
||||
Skill: `.agents/skills/tdd-workflow/`
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
|
||||
# Test Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
Analyze Vitest coverage and add missing tests:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `pnpm test` (packages that support coverage: `pnpm --filter <pkg> test -- --coverage` when configured)
|
||||
|
||||
2. Identify files below 80%
|
||||
|
||||
3. For each under-covered file:
|
||||
- Unit tests for validators, transformers, utils, stores
|
||||
- Testing Library tests for `@repo/ui` components
|
||||
- Journey tests for critical `apps/web` flows (mock data services)
|
||||
|
||||
4. Verify new tests pass
|
||||
|
||||
5. Show before/after coverage
|
||||
|
||||
Focus on:
|
||||
- Happy path
|
||||
- Error handling
|
||||
- Edge cases (null, undefined, empty)
|
||||
- Zod boundary conditions (`rangeLength`)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
|
||||
# Update Codemaps
|
||||
|
||||
Analyze the monorepo and refresh architecture notes. This is a frontend repo — no backend/database maps.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Scan apps and packages for public exports and app entry points
|
||||
2. Write token-lean maps (only if a `codemaps/` folder already exists; otherwise update `apps/docs-dev`):
|
||||
- architecture.md — apps vs packages, import rules
|
||||
- web-modules.md — `apps/web` module layout (`example/full-page`)
|
||||
- packages.md — `@repo/ui`, `@repo/core-*`, `@repo/utils`, `@repo/brand`
|
||||
3. Do **not** create `codemaps/backend.md` or database schemas
|
||||
4. If the diff vs the previous map is > 30%, ask before overwriting
|
||||
5. Stamp each file with a freshness date
|
||||
6. Optional report: `.reports/codemap-diff.txt`
|
||||
|
||||
Focus on high-level structure (`apps/`, `packages/`, module layers), not implementation details.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
|
||||
# Update Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
Sync docs with this frontend monorepo. Source of truth: `package.json`, `apps/web/.env.example`, and `apps/docs-dev` (VitePress).
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read root `package.json` scripts
|
||||
- Table of `pnpm dev:web`, `pnpm dev:showcase`, `pnpm dev:docs-dev`, `pnpm typecheck:web`, `pnpm test`, `pnpm check:all`
|
||||
|
||||
2. Read `apps/web/.env.example`
|
||||
- Document each `VITE_*` var (they are public to the client)
|
||||
|
||||
3. Update `apps/docs-dev` (VitePress) and the root README
|
||||
- Where to work (`apps/web` vs `showcase`)
|
||||
- Module layout (`example/full-page`)
|
||||
- Preferred `@repo/*` imports
|
||||
|
||||
4. Do **not** generate `docs/CONTRIB.md` / `docs/RUNBOOK.md` unless those files already exist. This repo's docs app is `apps/docs-dev`.
|
||||
|
||||
5. List docs not modified in 90+ days for manual review
|
||||
|
||||
6. Show a diff summary
|
||||
|
||||
Single source of truth: `package.json`, `apps/web/.env.example`, `apps/docs-dev`, `apps/showcase` (API shape).
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
|
||||
# Verification Command
|
||||
|
||||
Run comprehensive verification on current codebase state.
|
||||
|
||||
## Instructions
|
||||
|
||||
Execute verification in this exact order:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Build Check**
|
||||
- Run the build command for this project
|
||||
- If it fails, report errors and STOP
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Type Check**
|
||||
- Run TypeScript/type checker
|
||||
- Report all errors with file:line
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Lint Check**
|
||||
- Run linter
|
||||
- Report warnings and errors
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Test Suite**
|
||||
- Run all tests
|
||||
- Report pass/fail count
|
||||
- Report coverage percentage
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Console.log Audit**
|
||||
- Search for console.log in source files
|
||||
- Report locations
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Git Status**
|
||||
- Show uncommitted changes
|
||||
- Show files modified since last commit
|
||||
|
||||
## Output
|
||||
|
||||
Produce a concise verification report:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
VERIFICATION: [PASS/FAIL]
|
||||
|
||||
Build: [OK/FAIL]
|
||||
Types: [OK/X errors]
|
||||
Lint: [OK/X issues]
|
||||
Tests: [X/Y passed, Z% coverage]
|
||||
Secrets: [OK/X found]
|
||||
Logs: [OK/X console.logs]
|
||||
|
||||
Ready for PR: [YES/NO]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If any critical issues, list them with fix suggestions.
|
||||
|
||||
## Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
$ARGUMENTS can be:
|
||||
- `quick` - Only build + types
|
||||
- `full` - All checks (default)
|
||||
- `pre-commit` - Checks relevant for commits
|
||||
- `pre-pr` - Full checks plus security scan
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user