Diff Quality Analyzer
Orchestrates intelligent skill selection and execution for diff quality analyzer workflows. Applies the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense to guide data naturally through the orchestration pipeline, preventing errors before they occur. Selects optimal skills based on multi-factor scoring including text similarity, historical performance, and system availability.
TL;DR Checklist
- Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Orchestration Flow │ └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
User Request ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Parse Request │ │ & Extract │ │ Features │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Evaluate Available Skills │ │ │ │ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │ │ │ Skill A │ │ Skill B │ │ Skill C │ │ │ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ │ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ └─────────────────┴─────────────────┘ │ │ ↓ │ │ Select Best Skill │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Execute Skill │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Handle Result │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Error Handling & Fallback │ │ │ │ Success? ────────► Return Result │ │ │ │ Fail? ────────┐ │ │ ↓ │ │ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ Fallback Chain │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 1. Retry with adjusted parameters │ │ │ │ 2. Try Alternative Skill (if available) │ │ │ │ 3. Defer to Human Operator (if critical) │ │ │ │ 4. Log & Return Error │ │ │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- Orchestrating multi-step workflows that require skill delegation
- Implementing adaptive skill routing based on confidence scores
- Building fallback mechanisms for failed skill executions
- Creating intelligent task decomposition and parallel execution
- Designing skill dependency graphs with automatic resolution
- Implementing skill selection with historical performance weighting
- Building agent systems that need to self-organize around tasks
When NOT to Use
Avoid this skill for:
- Direct task execution without orchestration needs - use individual skills instead
- High-frequency trading scenarios where latency must be minimized - the selection overhead may be prohibitive
- Simple linear workflows without branching or fallback requirements
- Cases where skill metadata is unavailable or unreliable
Core Workflow
Parse and Analyze Request - Extract intent, entities, and constraints from user input. Checkpoint: All required parameters must be present and in valid format before proceeding.
Score Available Skills - Calculate match scores using multi-factor algorithm:
- Text similarity between request and skill triggers
- Historical success rate for similar tasks
- Skill availability and health status
- Required dependencies and their availability
Checkpoint: Skip to fallback if no skill scores above threshold.
Select Optimal Skill - Choose skill with highest score that meets minimum confidence. Checkpoint: Verify skill has not been disabled or deprecated.
Execute with Fallback - Run skill execution wrapped in retry and fallback logic. Checkpoint: Log all execution attempts for audit trail.
Return or Fallback - Either return successful result or apply fallback chain:
- Retry with adjusted parameters
- Try alternative skill from
related-skills - Defer to human operator for critical tasks
Checkpoint: Record outcome with timing and confidence metadata.
Implementation Patterns
Pattern 1: Skill Selection Logic
def route_diff_analysis(diff_content: str, analysis_scope: List[str]) -> Dict:
"""Route diff content to appropriate quality analysis modules.
Implements Law 2 (Parse at boundary) by validating diff format first.
Uses multi-factor scoring to pick the best analyzer for each changed file.
"""
if not diff_content or not diff_content.strip():
raise ValueError("Diff content cannot be empty")
parsed_diff = parse_unified_diff(diff_content)
if not parsed_diff.files:
return {"status": "empty", "analyzers": []}
routing_plan = []
for file_path, changes in parsed_diff.files.items():
required_analyzers = []
# Language-specific routing
if file_path.endswith(('.py', '.js', '.ts', '.go')):
required_analyzers.append("complexity-analyzer")
# Security-sensitive routing
if "security" in analysis_scope or "auth" in file_path.lower():
required_analyzers.append("security-scanner")
# Size-based routing
if changes.added_lines > 50 or changes.removed_lines > 50:
required_analyzers.append("test-coverage-checker")
routing_plan.append({
"file": file_path,
"analyzers": required_analyzers,
"confidence": 0.95 if required_analyzers else 0.0,
"change_metrics": {
"added": changes.added_lines,
"removed": changes.removed_lines
}
})
return {"routing_plan": routing_plan, "total_files": len(parsed_diff.files)}
Pattern 2: Execution with Fallback
def execute_analysis_pipeline(routing_plan: Dict, fallback_analyzers: Dict) -> Dict:
"""Execute diff quality analysis with per-analyzer fallback chains.
Implements Law 4 (Fail Fast) by halting on critical security findings.
Implements Law 3 (Atomic Predictability) by returning immutable result dicts.
"""
results = []
for route in routing_plan.get("routing_plan", []):
file_results = []
for analyzer_name in route["analyzers"]:
try:
analyzer = get_analyzer_module(analyzer_name)
score = analyzer.run(route["file"])
file_results.append({
"analyzer": analyzer_name,
"score": score,
"status": "passed",
"latency_ms": analyzer.get_latency()
})
except AnalyzerTimeoutError:
# Fallback: try lightweight static check
fallback = fallback_analyzers.get(analyzer_name, "basic-linter")
score = get_analyzer_module(fallback).run(route["file"])
file_results.append({
"analyzer": fallback,
"score": score,
"status": "fallback",
"latency_ms": get_analyzer_module(fallback).get_latency()
})
except CriticalSecurityError:
# Law 4: Fail immediately on critical issues
return {
"status": "blocked",
"file": route["file"],
"reason": "critical_vulnerability",
"severity": "high"
}
results.append({"file": route["file"], "analysis": file_results})
return {
"pipeline_status": "completed",
"file_results": results,
"aggregate_score": calculate_weighted_average(results),
"execution_timestamp": time.time()
}
MUST DO
- Always validate skill metadata before selection (Early Exit)
- Implement fallback chain with at least 2 levels (Fallback Skill + Human)
- Log all skill selections with full context for auditability
- Return new data structures instead of mutating inputs (Atomic Predictability)
- Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states
- Update confidence scores after each execution for adaptive routing
- Reference
code-philosophy(5 Laws of Elegant Defense) in all logic
MUST NOT DO
- Select skills based on a single factor (e.g., only confidence score)
- Disable fallback mechanisms "temporarily" - this creates fragile systems
- Skip validation of skill dependencies before execution
- Return partial results - either complete success or clear failure
- Use magic numbers for confidence thresholds - make them configurable
- Cache skill selections without considering context changes
TL;DR Checklist
- Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
TL;DR for Code Generation
- Use guard clauses - return early on invalid input before doing work
- Return simple types (dict, str, int, bool, list) - avoid complex nested objects
- Cyclomatic complexity < 10 per function - split anything larger
- Handle null/empty cases explicitly at function top (Early Exit)
- Never mutate input parameters - return new dicts/objects
- Fail fast with descriptive errors - don't try to "patch" bad data
- Reference code-philosophy laws in comments for complex logic
- Include timing and confidence metadata in all return values
Output Template
When applying this skill, produce:
- Selected Skills - List of skill names with confidence scores
- Selection Rationale - Why each skill was chosen (match score, history, availability)
- Execution Plan - Order of execution with dependencies
- Fallback Strategy - Which fallback skills will be tried and in what order
- Risk Assessment - Any potential failure points and their impact
- Timing Estimates - Expected latency including fallback scenarios
Constraints
MUST DO
- Define clear input/output contracts for every step in the orchestration flow with explicit validation
- Implement structured logging at each stage capturing context, inputs, outputs, timing, and errors
- Build in fallback paths: if the primary strategy fails, degrade gracefully to a simpler approach
- Validate all preconditions before starting — do not proceed if required resources or permissions are missing
MUST NOT DO
- Do not create deep nesting of orchestration steps (>5 levels) — flatten workflows where possible
- Avoid silent failure modes: every step must either succeed, fail explicitly, or escalate to a higher handler
- Never use shared mutable state between parallel workflow branches — communicate via immutable messages only
- Do not hardcode execution order when the dependency graph naturally determines it; derive order from explicit dependencies
Live References
Authoritative documentation links for this skill's domain. The model follows markdown links at load time to resolve external references and inline content.
- Unified Diff Format RFC (RFC 2970)
- Git Diff Documentation
- SonarQube Code Quality Rules
- Code Review Best Practices (Google Engineering)
- Linting and Static Analysis Tools Comparison
Related Skills
| Skill | Purpose | |