qa-testability-advocacy@1.8.0
CAUTIONPublisher claims: "当测试发现"这个功能测不了"、"加个日志就能定位"、"这个模块没法 Mock"时使用此技能。从可控性(能否控制测试条件)、可观察性(能否看到内部状态)、可隔离性(能否独立测试)、自动化性和可诊断性五个维度评估系统的可测试性水平,给出具体的系统改进建议和推动策略。可测试性差的系统一定质量差——不是因为系统本身不好,是因为你根本测不透它。输出可测试性评估报告和各维度的改造建议。 ⚠️ 本技能含废弃测试清理建议,执行前请确认非关键数据。 触发场景:可测试性、难测、不好测、测试推动、架构改进、可测性评审、需要推动架构改进可测试性时。 Use when the user asks about: assessing and improving system testability — controllability, observability, isolatability, automability, and diagnosability." 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 290 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.