SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CB team-live-ops

Orchestrate the live-ops team — live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer — for a season or live event.

Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios Claude Code author: Donchitos MIT 1 file body ≈ 4 114 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 31 h ago

Orchestrate the live-ops team — live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer — for a season or live event.

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

GeneratorData and analyticstype 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
C
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
75
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
71/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
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:29
    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,automation,team.size,workflow`

Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")

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
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
  • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4114 tokens
  • 85Steps. 64 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
  • 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
  • 100Failures and branches. 4 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable

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)
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 144: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 17 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 64 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (0 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.