CC feedback
Report a Codewhale bug or idea as a GitHub issue. Use when: codewhale bug, feature request, feedback on codewhale, report an issue, or this should work differently.
Report a Codewhale bug or idea as a GitHub issue.
As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
ProcedureGitHubSoftware developmentData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: feedback (Hmbown/DeepSeek-TUI)
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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: Report a Codewhale bug or idea as a GitHub issue. Use when: codewh… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "invocation"
Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 7 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 216 tokens
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
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 164: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 5 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 7 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.