qa-retrospective@1.8.0
CAUTIONPublisher claims: "当一个迭代结束、一个项目完成、或者发生线上事故需要事后分析时使用此技能。通过系统性的回顾会议和数据复盘，把个人和团队的经验教训转化为可复用的组织资产。不要沦为"说说好话走个形式"——有效的复盘需要有数据支撑（缺陷趋势/漏测分析/效率数据）、有根因分析（为什么出问题）和有 action items（下次怎么做不一样）。输出复盘报告和改进项追踪表。 触发场景：测试复盘、迭代复盘、项目复盘、经验沉淀、漏测分析、回顾总结、事后分析、反复出现同类问题需要根因改进时。 Use when the user asks about: test retrospectives and post-incident review — defect trends, escaped-defect analysis, efficiency data, and turning lessons into reusable assets." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-10-29 and scored it 69/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
No other findings across 289 lines in 3 files.
What would make this Verified
11 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim kokxi: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
- npx invocation of non-well-known package≈ +2 on the totalPin versions and sources; vendor anything fetched at install time.