CC git-worktrees
Use when working on multiple branches simultaneously, context switching without stashing, reviewing PRs while developing, testing in isolation, or comparing implementations across branches - provides git worktree commands and workflow patterns for parallel development with multiple working directories.
Use when working on multiple branches simultaneously, context switching without stashing, reviewing PRs while developing, testing in isolation, or comparing…
As a process C 64/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, execution cost
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 10287 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 701, 1299): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 64/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 10287 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, git, python, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 85Steps. 141 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 6 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
- low 40 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (30 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)
- -4Absolute local paths (C:\Users, /home/…): not portable
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 303: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 83 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 141 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (81 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 73.