SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BB story-readiness

Checks whether a story is ready to implement: clear acceptance criteria, no open questions, valid ADR and dependencies. Use when the user asks if a story, or the sprint's stories, are ready to start or build.

Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios Claude Code author: Donchitos MIT 3 files body ≈ 3 699 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 33 h ago

Checks whether a story is ready to implement: clear acceptance criteria, no open questions, valid ADR and dependencies.

As a process B 71/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

AnalyzerData and analyticsWriting and documentsOperations and projectstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
83
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
71/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Broad scope meta-dynamic-shell SKILL.md:10
      Shell command executed automatically when the skill loads (Claude Code !`cmd` preamble)
      !`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,review_gate,automation,workflow,qa.level,gate_level,story_granularity,system_overrides`

    Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 21, 130, 140): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 71/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 10 mutating operations with no state check
    • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100Steps. 44 steps
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3699 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 208: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 13 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 44 items
    • +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 83.