[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6DSSA2RWRCSF7VS83ZXB3H2":3,"skill-same:01M6DSSA2RWRCSF7VS83ZXB3H2":113},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":15,"categories":16,"keywords":17,"publishedAt":35,"linkOnly":36,"markdownContent":37,"markdownBody":38,"frontMatter":39,"refName":40,"commitSha":41,"skillDirectory":42,"forksCount":43,"repositoryHtmlUrl":44,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":45,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":46,"install":47,"resources":60},"01M6DSSA2RWRCSF7VS83ZXB3H2","variant-analysis",null,"Find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across codebases using pattern-based analysis. Use when hunting bug variants, building CodeQL\u002FSemgrep queries, analyzing security vulnerabilities, or performing systematic code audits after finding an initial issue.","AntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code","AntifragileTech","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F174357194?v=4","01M6DQCYMK4CDSQQAN0ZC72NTV","01M6DQCYS9YPW1WKMQ5TJMPQ43",9,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002FSKILL.md",[],[18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34],"analysis","variant analysis","use","systematic","across","pattern","analyzing security","queries","issue","bug","security","find","semgrep","analyzing","codeql","code","vulnerabilities","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: variant-analysis\ndescription: Find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across codebases using pattern-based analysis. Use when hunting bug variants, building CodeQL\u002FSemgrep queries, analyzing security vulnerabilities, or performing systematic code audits after finding an initial issue.\n---\n\n# Variant Analysis\n\nYou are a variant analysis expert. Your role is to help find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across a codebase after identifying an initial pattern.\n\n## When to Use\n\nUse this skill when:\n- A vulnerability has been found and you need to search for similar instances\n- Building or refining CodeQL\u002FSemgrep queries for security patterns\n- Performing systematic code audits after an initial issue discovery\n- Hunting for bug variants across a codebase\n- Analyzing how a single root cause manifests in different code paths\n\n## When NOT to Use\n\nDo NOT use this skill for:\n- Initial vulnerability discovery (use audit-context-building or domain-specific audits instead)\n- General code review without a known pattern to search for\n- Writing fix recommendations (use issue-writer instead)\n- Understanding unfamiliar code (use audit-context-building for deep comprehension first)\n\n## The Five-Step Process\n\n### Step 1: Understand the Original Issue\n\nBefore searching, deeply understand the known bug:\n- **What is the root cause?** Not the symptom, but WHY it's vulnerable\n- **What conditions are required?** Control flow, data flow, state\n- **What makes it exploitable?** User control, missing validation, etc.\n\n### Step 2: Create an Exact Match\n\nStart with a pattern that matches ONLY the known instance:\n```bash\nrg -n \"exact_vulnerable_code_here\"\n```\nVerify: Does it match exactly ONE location (the original)?\n\n### Step 3: Identify Abstraction Points\n\n| Element | Keep Specific | Can Abstract |\n|---------|---------------|--------------|\n| Function name | If unique to bug | If pattern applies to family |\n| Variable names | Never | Always use metavariables |\n| Literal values | If value matters | If any value triggers bug |\n| Arguments | If position matters | Use `...` wildcards |\n\n### Step 4: Iteratively Generalize\n\n**Change ONE element at a time:**\n1. Run the pattern\n2. Review ALL new matches\n3. Classify: true positive or false positive?\n4. If FP rate acceptable, generalize next element\n5. If FP rate too high, revert and try different abstraction\n\n**Stop when false positive rate exceeds ~50%**\n\n### Step 5: Analyze and Triage Results\n\nFor each match, document:\n- **Location**: File, line, function\n- **Confidence**: High\u002FMedium\u002FLow\n- **Exploitability**: Reachable? Controllable inputs?\n- **Priority**: Based on impact and exploitability\n\nFor deeper strategic guidance, see [METHODOLOGY.md](METHODOLOGY.md).\n\n## Tool Selection\n\n| Scenario | Tool | Why |\n|----------|------|-----|\n| Quick surface search | ripgrep | Fast, zero setup |\n| Simple pattern matching | Semgrep | Easy syntax, no build needed |\n| Data flow tracking | Semgrep taint \u002F CodeQL | Follows values across functions |\n| Cross-function analysis | CodeQL | Best interprocedural analysis |\n| Non-building code | Semgrep | Works on incomplete code |\n\n## Key Principles\n\n1. **Root cause first**: Understand WHY before searching for WHERE\n2. **Start specific**: First pattern should match exactly the known bug\n3. **One change at a time**: Generalize incrementally, verify after each change\n4. **Know when to stop**: 50%+ FP rate means you've gone too generic\n5. **Search everywhere**: Always search the ENTIRE codebase, not just the module where the bug was found\n6. **Expand vulnerability classes**: One root cause often has multiple manifestations\n\n## Critical Pitfalls to Avoid\n\nThese common mistakes cause analysts to miss real vulnerabilities:\n\n### 1. Narrow Search Scope\n\nSearching only the module where the original bug was found misses variants in other locations.\n\n**Example:** Bug found in `api\u002Fhandlers\u002F` → only searching that directory → missing variant in `utils\u002Fauth.py`\n\n**Mitigation:** Always run searches against the entire codebase root directory.\n\n### 2. Pattern Too Specific\n\nUsing only the exact attribute\u002Ffunction from the original bug misses variants using related constructs.\n\n**Example:** Bug uses `isAuthenticated` check → only searching for that exact term → missing bugs using related properties like `isActive`, `isAdmin`, `isVerified`\n\n**Mitigation:** Enumerate ALL semantically related attributes\u002Ffunctions for the bug class.\n\n### 3. Single Vulnerability Class\n\nFocusing on only one manifestation of the root cause misses other ways the same logic error appears.\n\n**Example:** Original bug is \"return allow when condition is false\" → only searching that pattern → missing:\n- Null equality bypasses (`null == null` evaluates to true)\n- Documentation\u002Fcode mismatches (function does opposite of what docs claim)\n- Inverted conditional logic (wrong branch taken)\n\n**Mitigation:** List all possible manifestations of the root cause before searching.\n\n### 4. Missing Edge Cases\n\nTesting patterns only with \"normal\" scenarios misses vulnerabilities triggered by edge cases.\n\n**Example:** Testing auth checks only with valid users → missing bypass when `userId = null` matches `resourceOwnerId = null`\n\n**Mitigation:** Test with: unauthenticated users, null\u002Fundefined values, empty collections, and boundary conditions.\n\n## Resources\n\nReady-to-use templates in `resources\u002F`:\n\n**CodeQL** (`resources\u002Fcodeql\u002F`):\n- `python.ql`, `javascript.ql`, `java.ql`, `go.ql`, `cpp.ql`\n\n**Semgrep** (`resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002F`):\n- `python.yaml`, `javascript.yaml`, `java.yaml`, `go.yaml`, `cpp.yaml`\n\n**Report**: `resources\u002Fvariant-report-template.md`\n","# Variant Analysis\n\nYou are a variant analysis expert. Your role is to help find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across a codebase after identifying an initial pattern.\n\n## When to Use\n\nUse this skill when:\n- A vulnerability has been found and you need to search for similar instances\n- Building or refining CodeQL\u002FSemgrep queries for security patterns\n- Performing systematic code audits after an initial issue discovery\n- Hunting for bug variants across a codebase\n- Analyzing how a single root cause manifests in different code paths\n\n## When NOT to Use\n\nDo NOT use this skill for:\n- Initial vulnerability discovery (use audit-context-building or domain-specific audits instead)\n- General code review without a known pattern to search for\n- Writing fix recommendations (use issue-writer instead)\n- Understanding unfamiliar code (use audit-context-building for deep comprehension first)\n\n## The Five-Step Process\n\n### Step 1: Understand the Original Issue\n\nBefore searching, deeply understand the known bug:\n- **What is the root cause?** Not the symptom, but WHY it's vulnerable\n- **What conditions are required?** Control flow, data flow, state\n- **What makes it exploitable?** User control, missing validation, etc.\n\n### Step 2: Create an Exact Match\n\nStart with a pattern that matches ONLY the known instance:\n```bash\nrg -n \"exact_vulnerable_code_here\"\n```\nVerify: Does it match exactly ONE location (the original)?\n\n### Step 3: Identify Abstraction Points\n\n| Element | Keep Specific | Can Abstract |\n|---------|---------------|--------------|\n| Function name | If unique to bug | If pattern applies to family |\n| Variable names | Never | Always use metavariables |\n| Literal values | If value matters | If any value triggers bug |\n| Arguments | If position matters | Use `...` wildcards |\n\n### Step 4: Iteratively Generalize\n\n**Change ONE element at a time:**\n1. Run the pattern\n2. Review ALL new matches\n3. Classify: true positive or false positive?\n4. If FP rate acceptable, generalize next element\n5. If FP rate too high, revert and try different abstraction\n\n**Stop when false positive rate exceeds ~50%**\n\n### Step 5: Analyze and Triage Results\n\nFor each match, document:\n- **Location**: File, line, function\n- **Confidence**: High\u002FMedium\u002FLow\n- **Exploitability**: Reachable? Controllable inputs?\n- **Priority**: Based on impact and exploitability\n\nFor deeper strategic guidance, see [METHODOLOGY.md](METHODOLOGY.md).\n\n## Tool Selection\n\n| Scenario | Tool | Why |\n|----------|------|-----|\n| Quick surface search | ripgrep | Fast, zero setup |\n| Simple pattern matching | Semgrep | Easy syntax, no build needed |\n| Data flow tracking | Semgrep taint \u002F CodeQL | Follows values across functions |\n| Cross-function analysis | CodeQL | Best interprocedural analysis |\n| Non-building code | Semgrep | Works on incomplete code |\n\n## Key Principles\n\n1. **Root cause first**: Understand WHY before searching for WHERE\n2. **Start specific**: First pattern should match exactly the known bug\n3. **One change at a time**: Generalize incrementally, verify after each change\n4. **Know when to stop**: 50%+ FP rate means you've gone too generic\n5. **Search everywhere**: Always search the ENTIRE codebase, not just the module where the bug was found\n6. **Expand vulnerability classes**: One root cause often has multiple manifestations\n\n## Critical Pitfalls to Avoid\n\nThese common mistakes cause analysts to miss real vulnerabilities:\n\n### 1. Narrow Search Scope\n\nSearching only the module where the original bug was found misses variants in other locations.\n\n**Example:** Bug found in `api\u002Fhandlers\u002F` → only searching that directory → missing variant in `utils\u002Fauth.py`\n\n**Mitigation:** Always run searches against the entire codebase root directory.\n\n### 2. Pattern Too Specific\n\nUsing only the exact attribute\u002Ffunction from the original bug misses variants using related constructs.\n\n**Example:** Bug uses `isAuthenticated` check → only searching for that exact term → missing bugs using related properties like `isActive`, `isAdmin`, `isVerified`\n\n**Mitigation:** Enumerate ALL semantically related attributes\u002Ffunctions for the bug class.\n\n### 3. Single Vulnerability Class\n\nFocusing on only one manifestation of the root cause misses other ways the same logic error appears.\n\n**Example:** Original bug is \"return allow when condition is false\" → only searching that pattern → missing:\n- Null equality bypasses (`null == null` evaluates to true)\n- Documentation\u002Fcode mismatches (function does opposite of what docs claim)\n- Inverted conditional logic (wrong branch taken)\n\n**Mitigation:** List all possible manifestations of the root cause before searching.\n\n### 4. Missing Edge Cases\n\nTesting patterns only with \"normal\" scenarios misses vulnerabilities triggered by edge cases.\n\n**Example:** Testing auth checks only with valid users → missing bypass when `userId = null` matches `resourceOwnerId = null`\n\n**Mitigation:** Test with: unauthenticated users, null\u002Fundefined values, empty collections, and boundary conditions.\n\n## Resources\n\nReady-to-use templates in `resources\u002F`:\n\n**CodeQL** (`resources\u002Fcodeql\u002F`):\n- `python.ql`, `javascript.ql`, `java.ql`, `go.ql`, `cpp.ql`\n\n**Semgrep** (`resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002F`):\n- `python.yaml`, `javascript.yaml`, `java.yaml`, `go.yaml`, `cpp.yaml`\n\n**Report**: `resources\u002Fvariant-report-template.md`\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"master","c73386b305dec167db7654e0e6feacb462d4f9dc","assets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis",1,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech","2026-10-02 14:22:14",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":48,"prompt":58,"zipAvailable":59},[49,52,55],{"tool":50,"command":51},"npx","npx skills add AntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code --skill variant-analysis",{"tool":53,"command":54},"bunx","bunx skills add AntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code --skill variant-analysis",{"tool":56,"command":57},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add AntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code --skill variant-analysis","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002FSKILL.md",true,[61,67,73,77,81,85,89,93,97,101,105,109],{"path":62,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":65,"sourceHtmlUrl":66},"METHODOLOGY.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",9590,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002FMETHODOLOGY.md",{"path":68,"resourceType":69,"resourceTypeDesc":70,"sizeBytes":71,"sourceHtmlUrl":72},"resources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fcpp.ql","OTHER","其他",3503,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fcpp.ql",{"path":74,"resourceType":69,"resourceTypeDesc":70,"sizeBytes":75,"sourceHtmlUrl":76},"resources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fgo.ql",2018,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fgo.ql",{"path":78,"resourceType":69,"resourceTypeDesc":70,"sizeBytes":79,"sourceHtmlUrl":80},"resources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fjava.ql",2365,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fjava.ql",{"path":82,"resourceType":69,"resourceTypeDesc":70,"sizeBytes":83,"sourceHtmlUrl":84},"resources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fjavascript.ql",1733,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fjavascript.ql",{"path":86,"resourceType":69,"resourceTypeDesc":70,"sizeBytes":87,"sourceHtmlUrl":88},"resources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fpython.ql",2447,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fcodeql\u002Fpython.ql",{"path":90,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":91,"sourceHtmlUrl":92},"resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fcpp.yaml",2795,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fcpp.yaml",{"path":94,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":95,"sourceHtmlUrl":96},"resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fgo.yaml",1797,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fgo.yaml",{"path":98,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":99,"sourceHtmlUrl":100},"resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fjava.yaml",2011,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fjava.yaml",{"path":102,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":103,"sourceHtmlUrl":104},"resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fjavascript.yaml",1715,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fjavascript.yaml",{"path":106,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":107,"sourceHtmlUrl":108},"resources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fpython.yaml",2002,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fsemgrep\u002Fpython.yaml",{"path":110,"resourceType":63,"resourceTypeDesc":64,"sizeBytes":111,"sourceHtmlUrl":112},"resources\u002Fvariant-report-template.md",1356,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fvariant-analysis\u002Fresources\u002Fvariant-report-template.md",[114,139,153,168,179,192],{"skillNo":115,"name":116,"nameZh":6,"description":117,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":118,"categories":119,"keywords":133,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT9Q6VYA615SCXR757TZZ7","writing-skills","Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fwriting-skills\u002FSKILL.md",[120,125,128],{"categoryNo":121,"categoryName":122,"taxonomyType":123,"taxonomyTypeDesc":124},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":123,"taxonomyTypeDesc":124},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":129,"categoryName":130,"taxonomyType":131,"taxonomyTypeDesc":132},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者","PROFESSION","适用职业",[134,135,20,136,137,138],"writing skills","writing","editing","work","deployment",{"skillNo":140,"name":141,"nameZh":6,"description":142,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":143,"categories":144,"keywords":147,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT9GFHDNY90P41WGAE1TV0","writing-plans","Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fwriting-plans\u002FSKILL.md",[145,146],{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":123,"taxonomyTypeDesc":124},{"categoryNo":129,"categoryName":130,"taxonomyType":131,"taxonomyTypeDesc":132},[148,149,135,150,151,20,33,152],"plans","writing plans","requirements","task","spec",{"skillNo":154,"name":155,"nameZh":6,"description":156,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":157,"categories":158,"keywords":161,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT9C6PFGD86WS3HY7YE3XG","docs:write-concisely","Apply writing rules to any documentation that humans will read. Makes your writing clearer, stronger, and more professional.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fwrite-concisely\u002FSKILL.md",[159,160],{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":123,"taxonomyTypeDesc":124},{"categoryNo":129,"categoryName":130,"taxonomyType":131,"taxonomyTypeDesc":132},[162,163,164,165,166,167,135],"docs:write concisely","write","docs","read","Rules","documentation",{"skillNo":169,"name":170,"nameZh":6,"description":171,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":172,"categories":173,"keywords":174,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT98AWQ27P0N1CG97WAG66","kaizen:why","Iterative Five Whys root cause analysis drilling from symptoms to fundamentals","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fwhy\u002FSKILL.md",[],[170,175,176,26,177,18,178],"why","kaizen","five whys","root cause analysis",{"skillNo":180,"name":181,"nameZh":6,"description":182,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":183,"categories":184,"keywords":185,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT93EH25NAX19R3WGE1P53","verification-loop","A comprehensive verification system for Claude Code sessions.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fverification-loop\u002FSKILL.md",[],[186,187,188,189,33,190,191],"verification loop","verification","loop","sessions","claude code sessions","system",{"skillNo":193,"name":194,"nameZh":6,"description":195,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":196,"categories":197,"keywords":198,"publishedAt":35},"01M6DT90GW7Z7VCN98P9DVYSNC","verification-before-completion","Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FAntifragileTech\u002Fantifragile-claude-code\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fthinking\u002Fverification-before-completion\u002FSKILL.md",[],[199,187,200,137,20,201,202,203],"verification before completion","commands","evidence","claim","complete"]