BD knowledge-explorer
Manages the research/ knowledge base of verified tool and library research entries via knowledge-explorer.py. Commands — list (browse by category or SDLC layer), fetch-github (draft entry from GitHub repo), add (validate and route to category dir), update-append (append dated revision), generate-descriptions (repair missing or low-quality descriptions), migrate (convert inline-header entries to frontmatter). Use when browsing KB topics, adding or updating research entries, fetching GitHub repo metadata, generating descriptions in parallel via Haiku subagents, or migrating old-format entries to skill-spec frontmatter.
Manages the research/ knowledge base of verified tool and library research entries via knowledge-explorer.py. Commands — list (browse by category or SDLC…
As a process D 35/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: ../../../plugins/development-harness/docs/sdlc-layers/, ../research-curator/references/entry-template.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 · 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
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../../../plugins/development-harness/docs/sdlc-layers/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../research-curator/references/entry-template.md - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 8, 46, 303): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
- 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: ../../../plugins/development-harness/docs/sdlc-layers/, ../research-curator/references/entry-template.md
- 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. 7 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 85Steps. 52 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3284 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (10 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 624: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 52 items
- +4Has examples (21 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.