BD example-argument-substitution
Test harness for Claude Code skill argument substitution — demonstrates capture-block pre-declaration, XML tag referencing, unintentional variable corruption in code blocks, and correct placement of shell examples in reference files. Use when verifying substitution behavior before applying a pattern to other skills, testing how arguments flow from skill invocations, or understanding the pre-declaration and reference file pattern with greet/farewell/inspect actions.
Test harness for Claude Code skill argument substitution — demonstrates capture-block pre-declaration, XML tag referencing, unintentional variable corruption…
As a process D 35/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: references/*.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Broad scope
meta-dynamic-shellreferences/argument-substitution-reference.md:133Shell command executed automatically when the skill loads (Claude Code !`cmd` preamble)!`cat /path/to/context.md`
-
low Broad scope
meta-dynamic-shellSKILL.md:90Shell command executed automatically when the skill loads (Claude Code !`cmd` preamble)!`echo "Loaded at $(date '+%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S') — first arg is: $0"`
Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/*.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: references/*.md
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 100Steps. 10 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1631 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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 469: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.