diegosouzapw 🔧 GitHub Workflow Automation
Overview
This public intake copy packages plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/github-workflow-automation from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses the external_source block in metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
🔧 GitHub Workflow Automation > Patterns for automating GitHub workflows with AI assistance, inspired by Gemini CLI and modern DevOps practices.
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: 1. Automated PR Review, ✅ What looks good, ⚠️ Potential Issues, 💡 Suggestions, 🔒 Security Notes, 2. Issue Triage Automation.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
- Automating PR reviews with AI
- Setting up issue triage automation
- Creating GitHub Actions workflows
- Integrating AI into CI/CD pipelines
- Automating Git operations (rebases, cherry-picks)
- Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: Patterns for automating GitHub workflows with AI assistance, inspired by Gemini CLI and modern DevOps practices.
Operating Table
| Situation | Start here | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| First-time use | metadata.json |
Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path through the external_source block before touching the copied workflow |
| Provenance review | ORIGIN.md |
Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source |
| Workflow execution | SKILL.md |
Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution |
| Supporting context | SKILL.md |
Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package |
| Handoff decision | ## Related Skills |
Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts |
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
- Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
- Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
- Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
- Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
- Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
- Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
- Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: 📋 Summary
Brief description of what this PR does.
Imported: 1. Automated PR Review
1.1 PR Review Action
# .github/workflows/ai-review.yml
name: AI Code Review
on:
pull_request:
types: [opened, synchronize]
jobs:
review:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
pull-requests: write
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- name: Get changed files
id: changed
run: |
files=$(git diff --name-only origin/${{ github.base_ref }}...HEAD)
echo "files<<EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "$files" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: Get diff
id: diff
run: |
diff=$(git diff origin/${{ github.base_ref }}...HEAD)
echo "diff<<EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "$diff" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: AI Review
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
const { Anthropic } = require('@anthropic-ai/sdk');
const client = new Anthropic({ apiKey: process.env.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY });
const response = await client.messages.create({
model: "claude-3-sonnet-20240229",
max_tokens: 4096,
messages: [{
role: "user",
content: `Review this PR diff and provide feedback:
Changed files: ${{ steps.changed.outputs.files }}
Diff:
${{ steps.diff.outputs.diff }}
Provide:
1. Summary of changes
2. Potential issues or bugs
3. Suggestions for improvement
4. Security concerns if any
Format as GitHub markdown.`
}]
});
await github.rest.pulls.createReview({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
pull_number: context.issue.number,
body: response.content[0].text,
event: 'COMMENT'
});
env:
ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}
1.2 Review Comment Patterns
# AI Review Structure
## Examples
### Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
```text
Use @github-workflow-automation-v2 to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
```
**Explanation:** This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
### Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
```text
Review @github-workflow-automation-v2 against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
```
**Explanation:** Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
### Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
```text
Use @github-workflow-automation-v2 for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
```
**Explanation:** This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
### Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
```text
Review @github-workflow-automation-v2 using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
```
**Explanation:** This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
### Imported Usage Notes
#### Imported: Available Commands
| Command | Description |
| :------------------- | :-------------------------- |
| `@ai-helper explain` | Explain the code in this PR |
| `@ai-helper review` | Request AI code review |
| `@ai-helper fix` | Suggest fixes for issues |
| `@ai-helper test` | Generate test cases |
| `@ai-helper docs` | Generate documentation |
| `/rebase` | Rebase PR onto main |
| `/update` | Update PR branch from main |
| `/approve` | Mark as approved by bot |
| `/label bug` | Add 'bug' label |
| `/assign @user` | Assign to user |
```
---
## Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
- [ ] Store API keys in GitHub Secrets
- [ ] Use minimal permissions in workflows
- [ ] Validate all inputs
- [ ] Don't expose sensitive data in logs
- [ ] Cache dependencies
- [ ] Use matrix builds for parallel testing
- [ ] Skip unnecessary jobs with path filters
### Imported Operating Notes
#### Imported: Best Practices
### Security
- [ ] Store API keys in GitHub Secrets
- [ ] Use minimal permissions in workflows
- [ ] Validate all inputs
- [ ] Don't expose sensitive data in logs
### Performance
- [ ] Cache dependencies
- [ ] Use matrix builds for parallel testing
- [ ] Skip unnecessary jobs with path filters
- [ ] Use self-hosted runners for heavy workloads
### Reliability
- [ ] Add timeouts to jobs
- [ ] Handle rate limits gracefully
- [ ] Implement retry logic
- [ ] Have rollback procedures
---
## Troubleshooting
### Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
**Symptoms:** The result ignores the upstream workflow in `plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/github-workflow-automation`, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
**Solution:** Re-open `metadata.json`, `ORIGIN.md`, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Check the `external_source` block first, then restate the provenance before continuing.
### Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
**Symptoms:** Reviewers can see the generated `SKILL.md`, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
**Solution:** Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
### Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
**Symptoms:** The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better.
**Solution:** Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
## Related Skills
- `@00-andruia-consultant` - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
- `@00-andruia-consultant-v2` - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
- `@10-andruia-skill-smith` - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
- `@10-andruia-skill-smith-v2` - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
## Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
| Resource family | What it gives the reviewer | Example path |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `references` | copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream | `references/n/a` |
| `examples` | worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream | `examples/n/a` |
| `scripts` | upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation | `scripts/n/a` |
| `agents` | routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package | `agents/n/a` |
| `assets` | supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package | `assets/n/a` |
### Imported Reference Notes
#### Imported: Resources
- [Gemini CLI GitHub Action](https://github.com/google-github-actions/run-gemini-cli)
- [GitHub Actions Documentation](https://docs.github.com/en/actions)
- [GitHub REST API](https://docs.github.com/en/rest)
- [CODEOWNERS Syntax](https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/about-code-owners)
#### Imported: ✅ What looks good
- Well-structured code
- Good test coverage
- Clear naming conventions
#### Imported: ⚠️ Potential Issues
1. **Line 42**: Possible null pointer exception
```javascript
// Current
user.profile.name;
// Suggested
user?.profile?.name ?? "Unknown";
```
- Line 78: Consider error handling
// Add try-catch or .catch()
Imported: 💡 Suggestions
- Consider extracting the validation logic into a separate function
- Add JSDoc comments for public methods
Imported: 🔒 Security Notes
- No sensitive data exposure detected
- API key handling looks correct
### 1.3 Focused Reviews
```yaml
# Review only specific file types
- name: Filter code files
run: |
files=$(git diff --name-only origin/${{ github.base_ref }}...HEAD | \
grep -E '\.(ts|tsx|js|jsx|py|go)$' || true)
echo "code_files=$files" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
# Review with context
- name: AI Review with context
run: |
# Include relevant context files
context=""
for file in ${{ steps.changed.outputs.files }}; do
if [[ -f "$file" ]]; then
context+="=== $file ===\n$(cat $file)\n\n"
fi
done
# Send to AI with full file context
Imported: 2. Issue Triage Automation
2.1 Auto-label Issues
# .github/workflows/issue-triage.yml
name: Issue Triage
on:
issues:
types: [opened]
jobs:
triage:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
issues: write
steps:
- name: Analyze issue
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
const issue = context.payload.issue;
// Call AI to analyze
const analysis = await analyzeIssue(issue.title, issue.body);
// Apply labels
const labels = [];
if (analysis.type === 'bug') {
labels.push('bug');
if (analysis.severity === 'high') labels.push('priority: high');
} else if (analysis.type === 'feature') {
labels.push('enhancement');
} else if (analysis.type === 'question') {
labels.push('question');
}
if (analysis.area) {
labels.push(`area: ${analysis.area}`);
}
await github.rest.issues.addLabels({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: issue.number,
labels: labels
});
// Add initial response
if (analysis.type === 'bug' && !analysis.hasReproSteps) {
await github.rest.issues.createComment({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: issue.number,
body: `Thanks for reporting this issue!
To help us investigate, could you please provide:
- Steps to reproduce the issue
- Expected behavior
- Actual behavior
- Environment (OS, version, etc.)
This will help us resolve your issue faster. 🙏`
});
}
2.2 Issue Analysis Prompt
const TRIAGE_PROMPT = `
Analyze this GitHub issue and classify it:
Title: {title}
Body: {body}
Return JSON with:
{
"type": "bug" | "feature" | "question" | "docs" | "other",
"severity": "low" | "medium" | "high" | "critical",
"area": "frontend" | "backend" | "api" | "docs" | "ci" | "other",
"summary": "one-line summary",
"hasReproSteps": boolean,
"isFirstContribution": boolean,
"suggestedLabels": ["label1", "label2"],
"suggestedAssignees": ["username"] // based on area expertise
}
`;
2.3 Stale Issue Management
# .github/workflows/stale.yml
name: Manage Stale Issues
on:
schedule:
- cron: "0 0 * * *" # Daily
jobs:
stale:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/stale@v9
with:
stale-issue-message: |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had
recent activity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs.
If this issue is still relevant:
- Add a comment with an update
- Remove the `stale` label
Thank you for your contributions! 🙏
stale-pr-message: |
This PR has been automatically marked as stale. Please update it or it
will be closed in 14 days.
days-before-stale: 60
days-before-close: 14
stale-issue-label: "stale"
stale-pr-label: "stale"
exempt-issue-labels: "pinned,security,in-progress"
exempt-pr-labels: "pinned,security"
Imported: 3. CI/CD Integration
3.1 Smart Test Selection
# .github/workflows/smart-tests.yml
name: Smart Test Selection
on:
pull_request:
jobs:
analyze:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
outputs:
test_suites: ${{ steps.analyze.outputs.suites }}
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- name: Analyze changes
id: analyze
run: |
# Get changed files
changed=$(git diff --name-only origin/${{ github.base_ref }}...HEAD)
# Determine which test suites to run
suites="[]"
if echo "$changed" | grep -q "^src/api/"; then
suites=$(echo $suites | jq '. + ["api"]')
fi
if echo "$changed" | grep -q "^src/frontend/"; then
suites=$(echo $suites | jq '. + ["frontend"]')
fi
if echo "$changed" | grep -q "^src/database/"; then
suites=$(echo $suites | jq '. + ["database", "api"]')
fi
# If nothing specific, run all
if [ "$suites" = "[]" ]; then
suites='["all"]'
fi
echo "suites=$suites" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
test:
needs: analyze
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
strategy:
matrix:
suite: ${{ fromJson(needs.analyze.outputs.test_suites) }}
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Run tests
run: |
if [ "${{ matrix.suite }}" = "all" ]; then
npm test
else
npm test -- --suite ${{ matrix.suite }}
fi
3.2 Deployment with AI Validation
# .github/workflows/deploy.yml
name: Deploy with AI Validation
on:
push:
branches: [main]
jobs:
validate:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Get deployment changes
id: changes
run: |
# Get commits since last deployment
last_deploy=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null || echo "")
if [ -n "$last_deploy" ]; then
changes=$(git log --oneline $last_deploy..HEAD)
else
changes=$(git log --oneline -10)
fi
echo "changes<<EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "$changes" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: AI Risk Assessment
id: assess
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
// Analyze changes for deployment risk
const prompt = `
Analyze these changes for deployment risk:
${process.env.CHANGES}
Return JSON:
{
"riskLevel": "low" | "medium" | "high",
"concerns": ["concern1", "concern2"],
"recommendations": ["rec1", "rec2"],
"requiresManualApproval": boolean
}
`;
// Call AI and parse response
const analysis = await callAI(prompt);
if (analysis.riskLevel === 'high') {
core.setFailed('High-risk deployment detected. Manual review required.');
}
return analysis;
env:
CHANGES: ${{ steps.changes.outputs.changes }}
deploy:
needs: validate
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
environment: production
steps:
- name: Deploy
run: |
echo "Deploying to production..."
# Deployment commands here
3.3 Rollback Automation
# .github/workflows/rollback.yml
name: Automated Rollback
on:
workflow_dispatch:
inputs:
reason:
description: "Reason for rollback"
required: true
jobs:
rollback:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- name: Find last stable version
id: stable
run: |
# Find last successful deployment
stable=$(git tag -l 'v*' --sort=-version:refname | head -1)
echo "version=$stable" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: Rollback
run: |
git checkout ${{ steps.stable.outputs.version }}
# Deploy stable version
npm run deploy
- name: Notify team
uses: slackapi/slack-github-action@v1
with:
payload: |
{
"text": "🔄 Production rolled back to ${{ steps.stable.outputs.version }}",
"blocks": [
{
"type": "section",
"text": {
"type": "mrkdwn",
"text": "*Rollback executed*\n• Version: `${{ steps.stable.outputs.version }}`\n• Reason: ${{ inputs.reason }}\n• Triggered by: ${{ github.actor }}"
}
}
]
}
Imported: 4. Git Operations
4.1 Automated Rebasing
# .github/workflows/auto-rebase.yml
name: Auto Rebase
on:
issue_comment:
types: [created]
jobs:
rebase:
if: github.event.issue.pull_request && contains(github.event.comment.body, '/rebase')
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
- name: Setup Git
run: |
git config user.name "github-actions[bot]"
git config user.email "github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com"
- name: Rebase PR
run: |
# Fetch PR branch
gh pr checkout ${{ github.event.issue.number }}
# Rebase onto main
git fetch origin main
git rebase origin/main
# Force push
git push --force-with-lease
env:
GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
- name: Comment result
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
github.rest.issues.createComment({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: context.issue.number,
body: '✅ Successfully rebased onto main!'
})
4.2 Smart Cherry-Pick
// AI-assisted cherry-pick that handles conflicts
async function smartCherryPick(commitHash: string, targetBranch: string) {
// Get commit info
const commitInfo = await exec(`git show ${commitHash} --stat`);
// Check for potential conflicts
const targetDiff = await exec(
`git diff ${targetBranch}...HEAD -- ${affectedFiles}`
);
// AI analysis
const analysis = await ai.analyze(`
I need to cherry-pick this commit to ${targetBranch}:
${commitInfo}
Current state of affected files on ${targetBranch}:
${targetDiff}
Will there be conflicts? If so, suggest resolution strategy.
`);
if (analysis.willConflict) {
// Create branch for manual resolution
await exec(
`git checkout -b cherry-pick-${commitHash.slice(0, 7)} ${targetBranch}`
);
const result = await exec(`git cherry-pick ${commitHash}`, {
allowFail: true,
});
if (result.failed) {
// AI-assisted conflict resolution
const conflicts = await getConflicts();
for (const conflict of conflicts) {
const resolution = await ai.resolveConflict(conflict);
await applyResolution(conflict.file, resolution);
}
}
} else {
await exec(`git checkout ${targetBranch}`);
await exec(`git cherry-pick ${commitHash}`);
}
}
4.3 Branch Cleanup
# .github/workflows/branch-cleanup.yml
name: Branch Cleanup
on:
schedule:
- cron: '0 0 * * 0' # Weekly
workflow_dispatch:
jobs:
cleanup:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- name: Find stale branches
id: stale
run: |
# Branches not updated in 30 days
stale=$(git for-each-ref --sort=-committerdate refs/remotes/origin \
--format='%(refname:short) %(committerdate:relative)' | \
grep -E '[3-9][0-9]+ days|[0-9]+ months|[0-9]+ years' | \
grep -v 'origin/main\|origin/develop' | \
cut -d' ' -f1 | sed 's|origin/||')
echo "branches<<EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "$stale" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "EOF" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: Create cleanup PR
if: steps.stale.outputs.branches != ''
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
const branches = `${{ steps.stale.outputs.branches }}`.split('\n').filter(Boolean);
const body = `## 🧹 Stale Branch Cleanup
The following branches haven't been updated in over 30 days:
${branches.map(b => `- \`${b}\``).join('\n')}
### Actions:
- [ ] Review each branch
- [ ] Delete branches that are no longer needed
- Comment \`/keep branch-name\` to preserve specific branches
`;
await github.rest.issues.create({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
title: 'Stale Branch Cleanup',
body: body,
labels: ['housekeeping']
});
Imported: 5. On-Demand Assistance
5.1 @mention Bot
# .github/workflows/mention-bot.yml
name: AI Mention Bot
on:
issue_comment:
types: [created]
pull_request_review_comment:
types: [created]
jobs:
respond:
if: contains(github.event.comment.body, '@ai-helper')
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Extract question
id: question
run: |
# Extract text after @ai-helper
question=$(echo "${{ github.event.comment.body }}" | sed 's/.*@ai-helper//')
echo "question=$question" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
- name: Get context
id: context
run: |
if [ "${{ github.event.issue.pull_request }}" != "" ]; then
# It's a PR - get diff
gh pr diff ${{ github.event.issue.number }} > context.txt
else
# It's an issue - get description
gh issue view ${{ github.event.issue.number }} --json body -q .body > context.txt
fi
echo "context=$(cat context.txt)" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
env:
GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
- name: AI Response
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
const response = await ai.chat(`
Context: ${process.env.CONTEXT}
Question: ${process.env.QUESTION}
Provide a helpful, specific answer. Include code examples if relevant.
`);
await github.rest.issues.createComment({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: context.issue.number,
body: response
});
env:
CONTEXT: ${{ steps.context.outputs.context }}
QUESTION: ${{ steps.question.outputs.question }}
5.2 Command Patterns
#### Imported: 6. Repository Configuration
### 6.1 CODEOWNERS
.github/CODEOWNERS
Global owners
- @org/core-team
Frontend
/src/frontend/ @org/frontend-team *.tsx @org/frontend-team *.css @org/frontend-team
Backend
/src/api/ @org/backend-team /src/database/ @org/backend-team
Infrastructure
/.github/ @org/devops-team /terraform/ @org/devops-team Dockerfile @org/devops-team
Docs
/docs/ @org/docs-team *.md @org/docs-team
Security-sensitive
/src/auth/ @org/security-team /src/crypto/ @org/security-team
### 6.2 Branch Protection
```yaml
# Set up via GitHub API
- name: Configure branch protection
uses: actions/github-script@v7
with:
script: |
await github.rest.repos.updateBranchProtection({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
branch: 'main',
required_status_checks: {
strict: true,
contexts: ['test', 'lint', 'ai-review']
},
enforce_admins: true,
required_pull_request_reviews: {
required_approving_review_count: 1,
require_code_owner_reviews: true,
dismiss_stale_reviews: true
},
restrictions: null,
required_linear_history: true,
allow_force_pushes: false,
allow_deletions: false
});
Imported: Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.