Neckbeard 插件发布：将应用代码转为可审查云基础设施并生成月度成本估算

The neckbeard handles your infra so you don't have to.

A plugin for your coding agent that turns an app into reviewable cloud infrastructure and a monthly cost estimate. AWS, GCP, or Azure; GitHub Actions or GitLab CI; serverless containers or Kubernetes — rendered from a bundled catalog of tested OpenTofu modules. The agent reads your app and explains; the planning, rendering, and validation are deterministic code. The agent never invents infrastructure.

Inspired by ponytail.

Install

Claude Code, as two separate prompts:

/plugin marketplace add bealesh/neckbeard

/plugin install neckbeard@neckbeard

Then, in your app's repo: /neckbeard:analyze. Your first /neckbeard: command installs the small neckbeard CLI the plugin drives (a sha256-verified release binary, or go install when Go is present) — nothing else to set up. Cost estimates and static validation use tools you may already have (Infracost, OpenTofu, Checkov); /neckbeard:doctor tells you which are missing and what each unlocks.

Codex, Cursor, or any SKILL.md-speaking agent: see INSTALL.md.

What happens

you:    /neckbeard:analyze
agent:  reads your repo → evidence-backed profile → asks what code can't tell it
you:    answer the questions, pick a cloud and a tier
you:    /neckbeard:estimate
agent:  plans against the catalog → "$77/mo expected — here's the table, and
        here's what Infracost can't price"
you:    /neckbeard:sync
agent:  scaffold → validate → "V0 PASSED; V1/V2 NOT EXERCISED; next step is
        docs/bootstrap.md"
you:    review the files like any PR; follow the runbook per environment

Commands

Why this exists

Coding agents are good at app code and bad at freehanding infrastructure. The failure mode is always the same: plausible-looking HCL that is subtly broken, insecure by default, and unestimable. neckbeard inverts the roles:

• Humans maintain the golden path — versioned OpenTofu modules, pipeline templates, GitOps layouts, per cloud, tested in CI on every change.
• The agent analyzes, parameterizes, and explains. It reads your app, figures out what it needs, and maps that onto catalog inputs — with evidence for every claim it makes.
• Everything in between is deterministic. Same inputs, same bytes: the planner emits a hash-verified blueprint.yaml lockfile, the renderer is a pure function of it, and regeneration never silently overwrites your edits.

Needs the catalog can't express become named findings ("redis is outside the workload contract"), not force-fits onto the nearest module.

The part nobody else tells you: what it costs

The same reference app (HTTP service + worker + cron + Postgres), smallest tier, all three environments, live prices via Infracost:

* Infracost can't price Container Apps compute yet — and instead of letting a low number lie, the report names every unpriced resource. That's the house style: baseline-while-idle costs, explicit usage assumptions you can edit, low/expected/high scenarios, and a provenance footer. It also prices your decisions: this table is why neckbeard tells solo developers "you don't need Kubernetes yet" — with receipts.

Honesty as architecture

Infrastructure tools love implying more than they've proven. neckbeard reports in three verdicts, and the third one is the point:

V0   PASSED         tofu validate [prd]
V0   PASSED         checkov policy [prd]        ← every skip carries a written reason
V0   PASSED         kubeconform (clusters/)
V1   NOT EXERCISED  authenticated plan          requires cloud credentials
V2   NOT EXERCISED  deployment verification     requires cloud credentials

• Static validation never claims deployability. V0/V1/V2 are distinct levels, each reported as exercised or not.
• Every Checkov skip in the generated .checkov.yaml states its reason. A skip without a reason is a lie about your security posture.
• When live runs break, the failures become public findings and then catalog fixes. Our first real deployment produced ten; five became fixes the same day.
• Degraded paths say why (Azure + GitLab merge-request plans can't federate — the pipeline says so instead of failing mysteriously).

（注：更多技术实现细节与完整 API 文档请查阅原项目 README）