SkillVaultskills Browse all 1,000+ skills

Maintenance · Version 1.1.0 · Reviewed 2026-08-02

Dependency Change Publisher

Reduce change risk for dependency diff review and compatibility validation with evidence, explicit trade-offs, and a verification plan.

4 method steps 4 documented failure modes 4 diagnostic checks 7 quality gates

Prepares dependency update changes with release-note evidence, transitive impact, lockfile integrity, compatibility tests, security context, and a rollback-ready pull request.

₹299 one-time

Get this skill archive

Install in your AI coding tool

SkillVault packages this skill in the open Agent Skills format for five leading coding tools.

What this skill helps you do

  • Dependency diff review
  • Compatibility validation
  • Update pull request publication

How Dependency Change Publisher works

You provide

Current versions, changelogs, support dates, and coverage

It inspects

Breaking changes and transitive pins behind dependency diff review

It decides

A compatibility validation sequence taking one major at a time

You verify

Suite green between increments with rollback proven

What it checks first

Dependency Change Publisher prepares dependency update changes with release-note evidence, transitive impact, lockfile integrity, compatibility tests, security context, and a rollback-ready pull request. Use it when the work involves Dependency diff review, Compatibility validation, Update pull request publication.

  1. Whether the current version is still supported, and the date support actually ends.
  2. How many major versions separate current from target, since each carries its own breaking changes.
  3. Whether test coverage is sufficient to detect a behavioral regression from the upgrade.
  4. Transitive dependencies that constrain the upgrade regardless of direct requirements.

Failure modes it recognizes

  • Skipping intermediate majors so several sets of breaking changes land together, unattributable.
  • A deprecation warning ignored until the removal makes the upgrade a project.
  • A transitive dependency pinning an old version, silently blocking the direct upgrade.
  • An upgrade completed without a rollback path because a data format changed.

Answers it will reject

  • Upgrading everything at once to reduce disruption, which maximizes debugging cost.
  • Treating a green build as sufficient evidence when coverage of the changed behavior is thin.
  • Deferring an end-of-life migration until support has already lapsed.

Decision rules it applies

  • Upgrade one major at a time with the suite green between each step.
  • Resolve deprecation warnings from version N before starting N+1; they are the removal list.
  • Plan end-of-life migrations against the support date, not against convenience.

Evidence it asks for

  • Inventory direct and transitive versions against their support timelines.
  • Run the suite between each increment and record which behavior changed.
  • Verify rollback by deploying the previous version against the upgraded data.

The method inside

  1. Establish what is actually true about dependency diff review from the supplied evidence, and mark what is missing.
  2. Identify the mechanism behind compatibility validation rather than restating the symptom.
  3. Choose the smallest defensible change for update pull request publication, weighing impact, confidence, effort, and reversibility.
  4. Define rollback and post-upgrade observation

Deliverables

  • Dependency diff review assessment
  • Compatibility validation decision and action plan
  • Update pull request publication verification checklist

Evidence requirements

  • Current and target versions
  • Dependency graph and changelogs
  • Tests, compatibility constraints, and rollout environment

Quality gates

  • Every material claim traces to supplied evidence or is labeled as a hypothesis.
  • The response follows the declared deliverable contract.
  • No execution, access, measurement, or verification is invented.
  • Secrets and personal data are redacted rather than repeated.
  • The user receives a concrete independent verification step.
  • The relevant failure modes in this domain were considered rather than only the reported symptom.
  • No listed anti-pattern was recommended as a solution.

Example task

Input

Publish this dependency upgrade as a focused pull request and verify whether the transitive and lockfile changes match the requested version move.

Expected output

Read the upstream release and security notes across every crossed version, inspect the resolved graph rather than the manifest alone, and run tests at the dependency boundary. The pull request identifies breaking behavior, generated lockfile movement, rollout exposure, and the exact revert path...

Boundaries and compatibility

Ideal for

  • Dependency diff review: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.
  • Compatibility validation: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.
  • Update pull request publication: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.

Out of scope

  • Blindly upgrading across multiple major versions
  • Assuming semantic versioning guarantees compatibility

Agent compatibility

  • GitHub Copilot Agent Skills
  • Cursor Agent Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • OpenAI Codex Skills
  • JetBrains Junie Skills

Tool policy: Advisory by default. No tools are assumed. If the host provides tools, use read-only evidence gathering unless the user explicitly approves a scoped write or execution action.