Pulled ALL skills from 15 source repositories: - anthropics/skills: 16 (docs, design, MCP, testing) - obra/superpowers: 14 (TDD, debugging, agents, planning) - coreyhaines31/marketingskills: 25 (marketing, CRO, SEO, growth) - better-auth/skills: 5 (auth patterns) - vercel-labs/agent-skills: 5 (React, design, Vercel) - antfu/skills: 16 (Vue, Vite, Vitest, pnpm, Turborepo) - Plus 13 individual skills from various repos Mosaic Stack is not limited to coding — the Orchestrator and subagents serve coding, business, design, marketing, writing, logistics, analysis, and more. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
5.1 KiB
5.1 KiB
title, impact, impactDescription, type, tags
| title | impact | impactDescription | type | tags | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keep Provide/Inject Mutations in the Provider Component | MEDIUM | Allowing injectors to mutate provided state leads to unpredictable data flow and difficult debugging | best-practice |
|
Keep Provide/Inject Mutations in the Provider Component
Impact: MEDIUM - When using reactive provide/inject values, mutations should be kept inside the provider component whenever possible. Allowing child components to mutate injected state directly leads to confusion about where changes originate, making debugging and maintenance difficult.
Task Checklist
- Keep all mutations to provided state in the provider component
- Provide update functions alongside reactive data for child modifications
- Use
readonly()to prevent accidental mutations from injectors - Document provided values and their update patterns
The Problem: Scattered Mutations
Wrong - Injector mutates provided state directly:
<!-- Provider.vue -->
<script setup>
import { ref, provide } from 'vue'
const user = ref({ name: 'John', preferences: { theme: 'dark' } })
provide('user', user)
</script>
<!-- DeepChild.vue -->
<script setup>
import { inject } from 'vue'
const user = inject('user')
// PROBLEMATIC: Mutating from anywhere in the tree
function updateTheme(theme) {
user.value.preferences.theme = theme // Where did this change come from?
}
</script>
Problems:
- Hard to trace where state changes originate
- Multiple components might mutate the same data inconsistently
- No centralized validation or side effects
- Debugging becomes a nightmare in large apps
Solution: Provide Update Functions
Correct - Provider controls all mutations:
<!-- Provider.vue -->
<script setup>
import { ref, provide, readonly } from 'vue'
const user = ref({ name: 'John', preferences: { theme: 'dark' } })
// Mutation function with validation
function updateUserPreferences(preferences) {
// Centralized validation
if (preferences.theme && !['dark', 'light', 'system'].includes(preferences.theme)) {
console.warn('Invalid theme')
return false
}
// Centralized side effects
Object.assign(user.value.preferences, preferences)
localStorage.setItem('userPrefs', JSON.stringify(user.value.preferences))
return true
}
function updateUserName(name) {
if (!name || name.length < 2) {
console.warn('Name must be at least 2 characters')
return false
}
user.value.name = name
return true
}
// Provide readonly data + update functions
provide('user', {
data: readonly(user),
updatePreferences: updateUserPreferences,
updateName: updateUserName
})
</script>
<!-- DeepChild.vue -->
<script setup>
import { inject } from 'vue'
const { data: user, updatePreferences } = inject('user')
function changeTheme(theme) {
// Clear intent: calling provider's update function
const success = updatePreferences({ theme })
if (!success) {
// Handle validation failure
}
}
</script>
<template>
<!-- data is readonly, prevents accidental mutation -->
<div>Theme: {{ user.preferences.theme }}</div>
<button @click="changeTheme('light')">Light Mode</button>
</template>
Pattern: Provide/Inject with Readonly Protection
Use readonly() to enforce the pattern at runtime:
<!-- Provider.vue -->
<script setup>
import { ref, provide, readonly } from 'vue'
const cart = ref([])
function addItem(item) {
cart.value.push(item)
}
function removeItem(id) {
cart.value = cart.value.filter(item => item.id !== id)
}
function clearCart() {
cart.value = []
}
// Provide readonly cart + controlled mutations
provide('cart', {
items: readonly(cart),
addItem,
removeItem,
clearCart
})
</script>
<!-- CartDisplay.vue -->
<script setup>
import { inject } from 'vue'
const { items, removeItem } = inject('cart')
// items.push(newItem) would trigger a warning in dev mode
// Must use provided removeItem function
</script>
<template>
<div v-for="item in items" :key="item.id">
{{ item.name }}
<button @click="removeItem(item.id)">Remove</button>
</div>
</template>
Benefits of This Pattern
- Traceability: All mutations go through known functions
- Validation: Centralized validation in provider
- Side Effects: Consistent side effects (logging, storage, API calls)
- Testing: Easier to test mutation logic in isolation
- Debugging: Clear mutation source in Vue DevTools
When Direct Mutation Might Be Acceptable
In rare cases, direct mutation may be acceptable:
- Very simple, local state within a small component tree
- Form state that's isolated to a single form wizard
- Temporary state that doesn't affect app logic
Even then, consider using readonly() with update functions for consistency.