Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足

Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足 is a skill for Claude Code from s977043/river-review. It costs 178 tokens per session (3,384 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review check for evidence that a code change’s affected areas, failure paths, and external dependencies were investigated.

In plain words
What is it for?
It looks for impact scans, failure tests, boundary tests, contract or idempotency tests, and explicit checks around external services and asynchronous work.
Why use it?
It helps reveal when a change has no recorded proof that callers, error cases, retries, timeouts, APIs, or repeat operations were checked.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the river-review plugin — 138 skills, 18 commands, 5 agents, 3 hooks shipped together

Good fit It looks for impact scans, failure tests, boundary tests, contract or idempotency tests, and explicit checks around external services and asynchronous work.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add s977043/river-review --skill impact-evidence-coverage
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/s977043/river-review

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install river-review, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 138 skills, 18 commands, 5 agents, 3 hooks.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/impact-evidence-coverage.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 178 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,384 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00178 $0.03384
Opus 5 $0.00089 $0.01692
Sonnet 5 $0.00036 $0.00677
Haiku 4.5 $0.00018 $0.00338

Measured 7d ago against content hash 079fcf16780f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足 scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 7d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/midstream/impact-evidence-coverage/SKILL.md · 147 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 147 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Pattern declaration

Primary pattern: Reviewer Secondary patterns: Inversion Why: 証拠の有無は grep / artifact 参照による決定論的突合が主だが、影響・失敗系・外部依存のいずれにも触れない変更では実行を止めるゲートが必要。

Goal / 目的

完成した差分に対し、次の 3 種のリスクを 調査した証拠が残っているか(evidence-sufficiency) を diff-time で検証する。defect そのものではなく「証拠の不在」を検出する。

  1. 影響調査(Impact): 共有シンボル・公開 API・広く参照される設定を変更したとき、影響範囲を repo 全体で調査した証拠(caller の走査記録・grep ログ・影響集合の列挙)があるか。
  2. 失敗系検証(Failure): 新しい分岐・throw・リトライ・タイムアウト・不可逆処理を追加したとき、失敗経路を観測した証拠(失敗系テスト・境界テスト・fail-safe 方向の退行検知)があるか。
  3. 外部依存確認(External): 外部 API・レート制限・リトライ・キャッシュ整合・非同期の再実行安全に触れたとき、その挙動を確認した証拠(契約テスト・冪等性テスト・タイムアウト設定の明示)があるか。

Non-goals / 扱わないこと

  • defect の検出そのものは行わない。caller 側残骸は cross-file-leakage、契約破壊は api-compatibility、外部依存の設計不備は external-dependencies、失敗経路のテスト欠落は coverage-gap / test-existence が担う。本 skill はそれらが指す「顕在した欠陥」ではなく「調査した証拠の不在」だけを扱う。
  • 全 Unknown カテゴリの横断合成は行わない。要件・plan・assumption・セキュリティを含む 6 観点全体の evidence-sufficiency を合成するのは agent-skill unknown-coverage-review(finding verification 後の合成ステップ)である。本 skill はその合成層が委譲する Impact / Failure / External の 3 軸のみを、keyword routing で diff-time に単独実行できる registry 版として担う。両者は責務が入れ子で、合成層が動くときは本 skill の findings を残余に取り込む(重複指摘しない分界は unknown-coverage-review の DELEGATION.md を SSoT とする)。
  • 証拠が実在するのに「なさそう」と推測して指摘すること。反証(grep・artifact 参照)できない証拠不在は question に留める。

Pre-execution Gate / 実行前ゲート

このスキルは以下の条件がすべて満たされない限り NO_REVIEW を返す。

  • inputContext に diff が含まれている。
  • 差分が リポジトリ内で実行されるコード・migration・schema・公開 API・設定 のいずれかに触れる(docs・コメントのみの差分は対象外)。
  • 差分が上記 3 軸(Impact / Failure / External)の少なくとも 1 つに該当する変更を含む。具体的には、共有シンボル・公開 API・広く参照される設定の変更(Impact)、新しい分岐・throw・リトライ・タイムアウト・不可逆処理(Failure)、外部 API・レート制限・キャッシュ・非同期の再実行(External)のいずれか。
  • ビルド成果物・生成物(dist/***.map・lockfile・自動生成 manifest)は Gate 判定からもレビュー対象からも除外する。

ゲート不成立時の出力: NO_REVIEW: impact-evidence-coverage — 影響・失敗系・外部依存に触れる変更が検出されない

False-positive guards / 抑制条件

低リスク PR(小さく明確なバグ修正・既存パターンの踏襲)で過剰な指摘を出さないため、次を厳守する。

  • 証拠の diff 同梱を充足とみなす: 影響調査・失敗系・外部依存の証拠が 同一 diff に同梱されている場合は指摘しない。証拠の同梱形態は次を含む。
    • 失敗系テスト・境界テスト・契約テスト・冪等性テスト・fail-safe 退行検知テストが同じ差分に追加されている。
    • caller 走査・grep の記録、影響集合の列挙、near-miss の棄却根拠が PR 本文または差分内コメントに書かれている。
    • タイムアウト・リトライ・レート制限・キャッシュ TTL の設定値が差分内に明示されている。
  • 証拠の別在の棄却が前提: 「証拠が repo 内・別ファイル・既存テスト・PR 本文に存在する可能性」を Grep / Glob / artifact 参照で棄却できた場合のみ finding 化する。棄却できなければ finding ではなく question とする。
  • 委譲先の領分を侵さない: 委譲表(unknown-coverage-review の DELEGATION.md)で defect 検出に割り当てられた指摘(caller 残骸・契約破壊・テスト欠落そのもの)は出さない。本 skill の finding は「証拠の不在(evidence_missing)」に限る。
  • 指摘上限: 観点(Impact / Failure / External)ごとに finding と question の合算で最大 3 件とする。question は info 相当として扱い、保持の優先順は findings(severity 降順)→ questions とし、上限超過分は優先度の低い側(questions → 低 severity findings)から切り捨てる。
  • correctness bug・セキュリティ欠陥そのものは対象外(defect 系観点の責務)。

Read the full file on GitHub · 147 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 7d ago First seen · 147 lines · 178 tokens per session scan A 079fcf16780f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

Impact Evidence Coverage 影響・失敗系・外部依存の証拠充足 is a skill published in the GitHub repository s977043/river-review (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 178 tokens to every session and 3,384 once invoked, about $0.0009 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

e2e-reviewer

Use when reviewing Playwright or Cypress E2E specs, Page Objects (POM), PRs, pull requests, patches, diffs, or changed test files — asked to review tests, audit test quality, or find weak, flaky, or silently-passing tests; when tests pass CI but prove nothing or miss bugs; when auditing missing awaits, vacuous or…

voidmatcha/e2e-skills · 115 tokens

write-e2e

Generate Playwright E2E tests from codebase analysis. Discovers routes, scores user flows by criticality, writes .spec.ts files that assert causality, and reports what was actually proven: GENERATED, STATICCHECKED, VERIFIEDLOCAL or VALIDATEDLIVE. Modes: --scope , --flow , --output , --base-url , --max-flows N, --live…

greglas75/zuvo · 101 tokens

e2e-reviewer

Catalog-only control for a preregistered e2e-reviewer ablation.

voidmatcha/e2e-skills · 23 tokens

test-audit

Batch audit of test files against Q1-Q25 quality gates and AP1-AP32 anti-patterns. Detects orphan tests, phantom mocks, untested public methods. Tiered output (A/B/C/D) with critical gate enforcement and optional post-audit fix workflow. Flags: zuvo:test-audit all | [path] | [file] | --deep | --quick | --include-e2e |…

greglas75/zuvo · 100 tokens

autonomous-review

Use to perform an end-to-end PR review and reach an approve/request-changes verdict — including verifying acceptance criteria, running E2E tests via browser automation, resolving merge conflicts, and (when verdict passes) merging the PR. Triggers on phrases like "review this PR", "decide whether to approve and merge"…

zxkane/autonomous-dev-team · 127 tokens

daa-review

Use when reviewing existing test code for DAA compliance, identifying anti-patterns, or suggesting improvements to automation test architecture.

gigayaya/DAA-Master · 26 tokens