SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC python3-add-feature

Executes a four-phase feature addition workflow (Discovery, Planning, TDD Implementation, Verification) for Python projects. Use when adding a new feature end-to-end — discovering project structure and integration points, drafting a feature spec with MoSCoW-prioritized requirements and BDD acceptance criteria, implementing via test-first TDD cycles, then verifying with ruff lint, ty type checks, and behavior-focused regression and contract coverage.

Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills Claude Code author: Jamie-BitFlight MIT 1 file body ≈ 2 759 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 8 d ago

Executes a four-phase feature addition workflow (Discovery, Planning, TDD Implementation, Verification) for Python projects.

As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

ProcedureSoftware developmentData 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
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
58/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

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

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 58/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
    • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 100Steps. 33 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2759 tokens
    • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low The response is described with custom markup (7 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 453: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 29 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 33 items
    • +4Has examples (15 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.