SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner with us中文AI newsFavorites
Skillsfcode-code-validation

fcode-code-validation

General & other

View repository

Updated 10-16 08:37

About this skill

Factorial Code — App validation

A pre-flight for the platform's own release validation (its criteria are in fcode-ama references/journey.md §8), run locally before the release is requested, adding the review dimensions a human gatekeeper would: forms and lifecycle, i18n, logging hygiene, security, email abuse.

It serves two audiences with the same procedure: an app developer self-checking before requesting a release, and a platform reviewer gating one. Either way the input is a workspace ("team") slug and the output is APP_VALIDATION_REPORT.md in the cloned workspace plus a ✅/❌ verdict in chat.

This skill owns only the procedure, the check catalog, the severities, and the report format. Every rule it checks is owned by another skill and cited on the catalog row — read the owner when a finding needs context.

Gotchas

  • This review is read-only. The only permitted writes are the clone itself and APP_VALIDATION_REPORT.md. Never fcode push, never --force, never settings:versions:create / settings:aliases:set, never edit workspace files, never fcode add the report.
  • Never fcode run during the review. Processes may call real APIs with credentials inherited from parent workspaces (fcode-core-concepts). This is a static review of code and config.
  • The clone slug is an encoded dev-… token, not the app's UUID from the browser URL — copy it from the app's "How to build locally" guide on its Development tab (see fcode-cli). A UUID-shaped slug will not clone.
  • Any Blocker → ❌. Warnings and Suggestions never flip the verdict.
  • Ambiguity blocks the review. If the user names a development team with several apps, or it's unclear which workspace (dev- / deploy- / prod-) to review, list the candidates and ask before cloning. dev- is the normal review target.
  • ******** placeholders in pulled variables are normal — a masked secret is never a finding, and the review never needs real secret values. Never ask for them.
  • A failing fcode clone usually means UUID confusion or missing access — point at the access flow in fcode-ama; don't retry blindly.
  • A mixed JS/Python workspace is fine — review each process with its own language's rules and note the mix in the report header.
  • Review only what the workspace owns. Inherited resources — modules, processes, and variables from parentTeams parents, variables.inherited.env, i18n/<locale>.inherited.yaml — were already validated when their owning workspace was published. Don't audit their content; findings may only concern how this workspace uses them.

Severity model

Severity Meaning Effect on verdict
Blocker Breaks at runtime, mishandles credentials, exposes the platform's mail domain to abuse, or fails a criterion the platform release gate checks Any one → ❌
Warning Violates a documented rule; expect reviewer pushback or future breakage Advisory
Suggestion Improvement aligned with platform conventions Advisory

Procedure

  1. Resolve the workspace. Confirm the slug is the encoded token (see Gotchas) and which workspace kind it is; disambiguate with the user when needed. Record the kind in the report header.
  2. Acquire. Missing CLI: ask the user, then pnpm install -g @factorialco/fcode-cli — the one permitted install. Fresh copy: fcode clone <workspace-slug> --skipSkillsSetup. Already cloned: fcode pull; on divergence never --force — ask whether to review the local state as-is and record the answer in the report header.
  3. Inventory (read-only). Detect the language per process (index.js vs main.py). List processes, modules, appRoles, and webhook/form settings from each processes/<slug>/metadata.json; read settings.json, the three variables files, variables.meta.json, and i18n/. Run fcode status, fcode variables:status, fcode settings:status, and fcode i18n:status. Separate owned from inherited as you go — the catalog applies to owned resources only (see Gotchas).
  4. Run the check catalog. Read references/checks.md and evaluate every check against the inventory, recording file:line evidence. Whether step 2 was a fresh clone or a pre-existing local workspace decides if the STRUCT layout checks run fully or are marked "N/A — fresh clone".
  5. Classify. Apply each catalog row's severity; deviate only where the row allows it, and say why in the finding.
  6. Write the report to <workspace>/APP_VALIDATION_REPORT.md following references/report-template.md, overwriting any previous run.
  7. Print the verdict in chat: the ✅/❌ line, per-severity counts, and the Blocker titles.

Check categories

STRUCT · LANG · FORM · I18N · SEC · MAIL · REUSE · LOG · LIFE · REL — the full catalog, with per-check severities and owner citations, is in references/checks.md.