ci-cd-generator
- Repo stars 0
- Author updated Live
- Author repo skills-registry
- Domain
- DevOps
- Compatible agents
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- Trust score
- 88 / 100 · community maintained
- Author / version / license
- @tomevault-io · no license declared
- Token usage
- Lean
- Setup complexity
- Manual integration
- External API key
- Not required
- Operating systems
- Linux · Docker
- Runtime requirements
- Node.js · Bun · Deno · Docker
- Permissions
-
- Read-only
- Write / modify
- Env read
- Network behavior
- Local-only
- Install commands
- 26 variants
Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.
Heads up: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: ci-cd-generator
description: Scaffold/audit GitHub Actions CI/CD — Go/Rust/TS. Generation: workflows + coverage gates (60–80%…
category: devops
runtime: Node.js / Bun / Deno / Docker
---
# ci-cd-generator output preview
## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: Scaffold/audit GitHub Actions CI/CD — Go/Rust/TS. Generation: workflows + coverage gates (60–80%), security scans (CodeQL/Semgrep, SCA, SBOM, gitleaks), N+1/race/leak/load tests. Audit: severity-ranked findings + diff fixes. Triggers: 'criar CI', 'gerar pipeline', 'auditar pipeline', '/ci-cd-generator'. Use when this capability is needed..
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “When to Use / Generation mode / Audit mode” and do not present inference as author intent.
## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “Scaffold/audit GitHub Actions CI/CD — Go/Rust/TS. Generation: workflows + coverage gates (60–80%), security scans (CodeQL/Semgrep, SCA, SBOM, gitleaks), N+1/race/leak/load tests. Audit: severity-ranked findings + diff fixes. Triggers: 'criar CI', 'gerar pipeline', 'auditar pipeline', '/ci-cd-generator'. Use when this capability is needed.”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “When to Use / Generation mode / Audit mode” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options. The source mentions slash commands such as `/valarmindskills`, `/ci-cd-generator`; use them first when your agent supports command triggers.
Name target files or source material, expected output, forbidden changes, and whether network or shell access is allowed. Permission fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, read environment variables.
Start with a small task and check whether the result follows “When to Use / Generation mode / Audit mode”. Inspect diffs, logs, previews, or tests before expanding scope.
Confirm the final output includes a concrete result, evidence, and next action. If it stays generic, tighten inputs, boundaries, and acceptance criteria.
---
name: ci-cd-generator
description: Scaffold/audit GitHub Actions CI/CD — Go/Rust/TS. Generation: workflows + coverage gates (60–80%…
category: devops
source: tomevault-io/skills-registry
---
# ci-cd-generator
## When to use
- Scaffold/audit GitHub Actions CI/CD — Go/Rust/TS. Generation: workflows + coverage gates (60–80%), security scans (Cod…
- Use it when the task has clear inputs, repeatable steps, and validation criteria.
## What to provide
- Target material, scope, expected result, and forbidden changes.
- Whether network, commands, file writes, or external services are allowed.
## Execution rules
- Organize steps around “When to Use / Generation mode / Audit mode” and keep inference separate from source facts.
- read files, write/modify files, read environment variables; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding the task.
## Output requirements
- Return the deliverable, key evidence, validation method, and next action.
- Mark missing information as unknown; do not invent commands, platforms, or dependencies. The author source anchors workflow facts; repository files anchor sources and commands; Fluxly only adds fit, limitations, and quality judgment.
skill "ci-cd-generator" {
input -> user goal + target files + boundaries + acceptance criteria
context -> When to Use / Generation mode / Audit mode
rules -> SKILL.md triggers / order / output contract
runtime -> Node.js / Bun / Deno / Docker | read files, write/modify files, read environment variables | mostly runs locally
guardrails -> usually needs no extra API key + small-sample validation + diff/log review
output -> copyable result + checklist + next iteration
} CI/CD Generator
Lifecycle skill that scaffolds a complete GitHub Actions pipeline for a Go, Rust, or TypeScript project. The workflow encodes opinionated defaults documented in the project owner's notes — coverage gates, N+1 query detection, race condition property-based testing, memory leak detection, and load testing — plus standard security gates (SAST, SCA, container scan, SBOM, secret scan).
When to Use
The skill has two operating modes — generation (the default, walks Phase 0 → 6 below) and audit (read-only review of an existing pipeline, walks Phase A0 → A5 in references/AUDIT.md).
Generation mode
- A new repository (Go, Rust, or TypeScript) has no
.github/workflows/directory and the user wants CI/CD wired up - An existing repository has an ad-hoc workflow that the user wants replaced with a complete, opinionated baseline
- The user explicitly asks for "criar CI", "gerar pipeline", "scaffold workflow", or invokes
/valarmindskills:ci-cd-generator - A polyglot monorepo needs per-language pipelines (run the skill once per project root)
Audit mode
- The repository already has workflows authored before this skill existed and the user wants them reviewed
- A security incident exposed a CI weakness (compromised secret, malicious action) and the user wants the full surface checked
- Pre-release gate: confirm the workflows match the security level the team thinks they are running at
- The user explicitly asks for "auditar pipeline", "audit CI pipeline", "review existing workflow"
This skill is language-aware and lifecycle-driven: it detects → asks the minimum needed → applies heuristics → emits YAML or report → validates. For multi-stack API security review (design + active testing + Go and Next.js stack-specific lifecycles) run from a CI pipeline, complement with @code-security-review (Go branch — references/golang/; Next branch — references/nextjs/). For Next.js performance audits, see @code-review references/NEXTJS.md.
Do not use when
- The user wants to fix or refactor a single line in an existing workflow — open the YAML directly or use
@github-pr-review. For a full pipeline audit, switch to audit mode instead. - The CI platform is GitLab CI, CircleCI, Buildkite, or Jenkins — this skill is GitHub Actions only
- The project language is not Go, Rust, or TypeScript (Node.js / Bun / Deno)
- The user wants to deploy infrastructure (Terraform, Pulumi, Kubernetes manifests) — pipeline ≠ infra
Prerequisites
| Tool | Purpose | Install |
|---|---|---|
gh (GitHub CLI) |
Branch protection, secrets management, dispatch | brew install gh then gh auth login |
actionlint |
Static lint of generated YAML | brew install actionlint |
yamllint |
Style and structural lint | brew install yamllint |
| Language toolchain on host | Local sanity check before commit | go, cargo, bun/pnpm/npm per project |
Required access:
- Read access to the repository root (for detection)
- Write access to
.github/and.github/workflows/ - Permission to commit on a branch (skill never commits without explicit user approval)
- If branch protection is part of the request: admin role on the repository
Phase 0 — Project Detection
Detect language, package manager, and runtime before generating anything. Run the steps in order; stop at the first conclusive match per axis.
# Step 1 — language
test -f go.mod && echo "language: go"
test -f Cargo.toml && echo "language: rust"
test -f package.json && echo "language: typescript"
test -f tsconfig.json && echo " ts-config: present"
# Step 2 — TypeScript runtime (only if language=typescript)
test -f bun.lockb && echo "runtime: bun, pm: bun"
test -f pnpm-lock.yaml && echo "runtime: node, pm: pnpm"
test -f yarn.lock && echo "runtime: node, pm: yarn"
test -f package-lock.json && echo "runtime: node, pm: npm"
# Step 3 — Rust workspace shape
grep -q '\[workspace\]' Cargo.toml 2>/dev/null && echo "rust: workspace"
# Step 4 — Go module shape
grep -E '^go [0-9]+\.[0-9]+' go.mod | head -1 # toolchain version
grep -q '^// +build' . -r 2>/dev/null && echo "go: legacy build tags present"
Persist as $LANG ∈ {go, rust, typescript}, plus per-language sub-fields ($RUNTIME, $PM, $WORKSPACE). The next phases branch on these values.
$LANG |
Reference to load | Default file emitted |
|---|---|---|
go |
references/GO.md | .github/workflows/ci.yml |
rust |
references/RUST.md | .github/workflows/ci.yml |
typescript |
references/TYPESCRIPT.md | .github/workflows/ci.yml |
polyglot (multiple matches) |
Run Phase 0 per subdirectory | One workflow per language detected |
If no match is found, abort with a one-line notice. The skill does not invent a language.
Phase 1 — Collect Preferences
Ask the user only for inputs that cannot be inferred. Use one consolidated AskUserQuestion block, never one question per phase.
| Input | Required | Default | Inferable from |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage threshold | No | 60 (per user heuristic) |
None — must default |
| Security level | No | standard (SAST + SCA + secret scan) |
None — must default |
| Container scan | No | true if Dockerfile exists, else false |
test -f Dockerfile |
| SBOM emission | No | true if security level = strict |
None |
| Release workflow (tag-driven) | No | true if goreleaser.yml exists or user has github-release-note history |
test -f .goreleaser.yml |
| Dependabot config | No | true (always) |
None |
| Load testing job | No | false (heavy; opt-in) |
Never default on |
| Branch protection rules | No | Suggest in report; do not apply automatically | None |
Three security levels:
minimal— lint + test + build. No security gates. Use only for prototypes.standard(default) — adds CodeQL/Semgrep, dependency audit, secret scanstrict— adds container scan (trivy), SBOM (syft), license check, signing
The full preferences-elicitation script lives in references/USER_HEURISTICS.md. It also documents the rationale for each default, citing the project owner's vault notes.
Phase 2 — Apply User Heuristics
The pipeline emits five opinionated checks regardless of language. Each is sourced from the project owner's notes and is mandatory unless the user opts out explicitly.
| # | Heuristic | Default behavior | Override flag |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coverage gate ≥ 60% (warn ≥ 80%) | Pipeline fails below threshold | --coverage=N or "ignore coverage" |
| 2 | N+1 detection | Integration tests assert max query count per request | --no-n1 |
| 3 | Race condition PBT | Concurrent property-based test job; -race flag in Go |
--no-race |
| 4 | Memory leak detection | Jest/Vitest --detectOpenHandles --detectLeaks (TS); -race (Go); miri optional (Rust) |
--no-leak-detect |
| 5 | Load testing | Nightly workflow_dispatch job using k6 or artillery (opt-in) |
Default off |
For each heuristic, references/USER_HEURISTICS.md contains:
- The exact rationale from the source notes
- The detection technique per language
- A copy-pasteable workflow snippet
- The expected failure mode if the heuristic catches something
Phase 3 — Wire Security Gates
Branch on the security level chosen in Phase 1. Each gate is a separate job that runs in parallel with the test job whenever possible.
| Gate | minimal |
standard |
strict |
|---|---|---|---|
actionlint self-check |
✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Lint + format | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Unit + integration tests | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Coverage gate | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| CodeQL / Semgrep (SAST) | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dependency audit (SCA) | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secret scan (gitleaks) | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Container scan (trivy) | — | conditional | ✓ |
| SBOM (syft / cyclonedx) | — | — | ✓ |
| License check | — | — | ✓ |
| Provenance / signing (cosign + SLSA) | — | — | optional |
Per-language tool selection (CodeQL languages, audit commands, container base scan strategy) is captured in references/SECURITY_GATES.md.
Anti-patterns the generator must refuse to emit:
pull_request_targetwith checkout of the PR head (RCE vector)permissions:defaulting towrite-allat the workflow level- Third-party actions without a pinned commit SHA when
security level = strict - Secrets passed via
env:at the workflow level (must be job- or step-scoped) actions/checkout@v4followed by running untrusted scripts before any allowlist check
Phase 4 — Generate Workflow YAML
Emit the YAML in this skeleton, populated from the language-specific reference:
name: ci
on:
push:
branches: [main]
pull_request:
branches: [main]
permissions:
contents: read
concurrency:
group: ci-${{ github.ref }}
cancel-in-progress: true
jobs:
meta:
name: actionlint
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: rhysd/actionlint@v1 # pinned via SHA in `strict`
lint:
needs: meta
# populated from <language>.md
test:
needs: meta
# populated from <language>.md
# includes: race flag, coverage gate, N+1 assertion, leak detection
security:
needs: meta
# populated from SECURITY_GATES.md per security-level
build:
needs: [lint, test, security]
# populated from <language>.md
Per-language fully populated workflows (with matrix, cache, environment variables, and the canonical job graph) live in:
- references/GO.md —
actions/setup-go@v5,go test -race -cover -covermode=atomic,staticcheck,golangci-lint,govulncheck, optionalgoreleaser - references/RUST.md —
actions-rust-lang/setup-rust-toolchain@v1,Swatinem/rust-cache@v2,cargo fmt --check,cargo clippy -D warnings,cargo nextest,cargo-llvm-cov,cargo-audit,cargo-deny - references/TYPESCRIPT.md —
setup-bun/setup-node+pnpm/action-setup,tsc --noEmit,eslint,vitest/jestwith--detectOpenHandles --detectLeaks, N+1 query test template,size-limit
Always pin third-party actions:
standardlevel:@vNmajor-version pinstrictlevel: full commit SHA pin (@<40-char-sha>) with a comment naming the version
Phase 5 — Validation & Dry-Run
Before reporting success, run the local checks:
# 1. Lint the YAML
actionlint .github/workflows/*.yml
yamllint -d relaxed .github/workflows/*.yml
# 2. Confirm secrets referenced in the YAML
grep -hoE '\$\{\{ secrets\.[A-Z_]+ \}\}' .github/workflows/*.yml | sort -u
# 3. Verify all third-party actions are pinned
grep -hE 'uses: ' .github/workflows/*.yml | grep -v 'actions/' | grep -v '@[a-f0-9]\{40\}\|@v[0-9]'
# 4. List required workflows for branch protection
grep -E '^ [a-z_-]+:$' .github/workflows/ci.yml | sed 's/[: ]//g'
Each finding is added to the post-generation report. If actionlint reports errors, abort and emit the diff for the user instead of writing the file.
The full validation matrix and the optional gh workflow run --ref <branch> ci.yml smoke test are in references/CHECKLIST.md.
Phase 6 — Deliver
- Write the workflow file(s) to
.github/workflows/. Default filename:ci.yml. Optional:release.yml,nightly-load.yml. - Write
.github/dependabot.ymlif Phase 1 enabled it. - Emit the generation report (see Output format).
- Surface the suggested branch protection rules — do not apply them automatically. Provide the
ghcommand the user can run. - Hand off to
@github-committo commit the new files; do not commit unless the user explicitly approves.
A worked end-to-end run of Phase 0 → Phase 6 for a Go API project is in EXAMPLE.md.
Audit mode (alternate entry)
When the user asks to audit an existing pipeline rather than generate one, branch at the very top of Phase 0 into the audit procedure documented in references/AUDIT.md. The audit walks Phase A0 → A5 (inventory → heuristic compliance → security gate compliance → anti-pattern sweep → action freshness → caching/concurrency hygiene) and emits a severity-ranked findings table with fix proposals.
The audit is read-only by default. The user can opt in per finding ID for the skill to apply unified-diff fixes; each fix is tagged SAFE / REVIEW / BREAKING and re-validated with actionlint before report-ok. The skill never commits.
Pick the entry point by user intent:
| Intent signal | Entry |
|---|---|
"criar CI", "gerar pipeline", "scaffold workflow", /ci-cd-generator on a repo with no .github/workflows/ |
Phase 0 (generation) |
"auditar pipeline", "audit CI", "review existing workflow", /ci-cd-generator on a repo with workflows present |
Phase A0 (audit) |
Ambiguous and .github/workflows/ exists |
Ask once: "audit existing workflows or generate a new baseline alongside?" — do not assume |
Constraints
- Never commit the generated YAML without explicit user approval — emit the diff first
- Never apply branch protection rules without an explicit
gh apicall confirmed by the user - Never emit
pull_request_targetwith PR-head checkout - Never default
permissions:towrite-allat workflow level — start atcontents: readand elevate per job - Never pass secrets via the workflow-level
env:; scope them to the job or step - Never use third-party actions without a version pin (major tag minimum, SHA in
strict) - Never generate a pipeline for a language outside
{go, rust, typescript}— abort with a one-line notice - Never silently downgrade the security level when a tool is missing — surface the gap to the user
- Must load the matching language reference before emitting any YAML
- Must run
actionlinton the generated file before reporting success - Must include a header comment listing required secrets, the trigger graph, and the source skill
- Must keep the workflow under 500 lines per file; split into
ci.yml+release.yml+nightly-load.ymlwhen needed - Must not invent secrets or repository variables — every
${{ secrets.X }}reference must be listed in the report
Output format
Generation report (printed verbatim after every successful run):
ci-cd-generator: <action>
language: <go | rust | typescript>
runtime/pm: <node+pnpm | bun | rust+nextest | go+toolchain x.y>
security: <minimal | standard | strict>
workflows: <files written, paths under .github/>
jobs: <ordered list of job ids in ci.yml>
required-secrets: <SECRET_A, SECRET_B, … or "none">
Suggested branch protection (run after committing):
gh api -X PUT repos/<owner>/<repo>/branches/main/protection \
-F required_status_checks.strict=true \
-F 'required_status_checks.contexts[]=lint' \
-F 'required_status_checks.contexts[]=test' \
-F 'required_status_checks.contexts[]=security' \
-F enforce_admins=true \
-F required_pull_request_reviews.required_approving_review_count=1
Next: review the diff, then `/valarmindskills:github-commit`.
Related Skills
@github-commit— commit the generated workflow files following Conventional Commits@github-release-note— generate release notes when the release workflow tags a version@github-pr-review— review the diff that introduces the workflow@clean-code— apply principles to the YAML (consistent naming, no duplication across jobs)@code-security-review— multi-stack security review job covering generic flows + Go (Gin/Fiber,references/golang/) + Next.js 16 App Router (references/nextjs/); active testing viareferences/TESTING_PHASES.md, run nightly via the load testing slot; 100-vuln class catalog viareferences/WEB_VULNERABILITIES.mdwhen the pipeline must spell out which classes each gate addresses@code-debugger— diagnosing a failing generated workflow before reporting it as broken
References
- GO — Go pipeline template, tooling matrix, canonical workflow
- RUST — Rust pipeline template, tooling matrix, canonical workflow
- TYPESCRIPT — TypeScript pipeline template (Node + Bun), N+1 and leak templates
- USER_HEURISTICS — coverage gate, N+1, race PBT, leak detection, load testing — rationale and snippets
- SECURITY_GATES — SAST, SCA, container, SBOM, secret scan, license — per-language tool matrix
- CHECKLIST — post-generation validation, branch protection, smoke test
- AUDIT — audit mode procedure, detection rules, severity matrix, report format, opt-in fix application
- EXAMPLE — end-to-end worked example for a Go API project
Source: Bruno-Cunha-Souza/ValarMindSkills — distributed by TomeVault.
Decide Fit First
Design Intent
How To Use It
Boundaries And Review