SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CB test-evidence-review

Quality review of test files and evidence — goes beyond existence, evaluates assertion coverage. ADEQUATE/INCOMPLETE/MISSING/NOT ASSESSED per story.

Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios Claude Code author: Donchitos MIT 1 file body ≈ 4 026 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 32 h ago

Quality review of test files and evidence — goes beyond existence, evaluates assertion coverage.

As a process B 69/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSoftware developmentData and analyticsWriting and documentstype 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
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
72
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
69/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
When it triggers w 12
20
Result and completion w 14
40
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:10
    Shell command executed automatically when the skill loads (Claude Code !`cmd` preamble)
    !`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys automation,workflow,qa.level,testing.strict`

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  • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 21): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

Process rating: all ten parameters 69/100

  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4026 tokens
  • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
  • 100Steps. 27 steps
  • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • 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
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 148: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 18 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 27 items
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.