AC commit-archaeologist
Reconstructs why code exists from local git history, including the introducing commit, later changes, current authors, repeated companion files, and likely intent. Use when the user asks "why does this code exist", "who wrote this function and why", or to "explain the history of this function" before a rewrite, refactor, or risky edit. Runs entirely locally.
Reconstructs why code exists from local git history, including the introducing commit, later changes, current authors, repeated companion files, and likely…
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
How to improve
- 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: 4. 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 59/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 15 mutating operations with no state check
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 30 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1235 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 360: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 30 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 97.
In the sandbox Скрипты не запустились
The skill's scripts were run in a throwaway machine: no network, fake keys in the home directory, a tracer watching. We wrote down what they did. Reaching for the network or for secrets caps the technical grade at C; a quiet run adds no points.
Запущено 1 скрипт; каждому дали двадцать секунд, поддельный домашний каталог с ключами и сеть, в которой ничего нет.
Ни один не дошёл до работы — им не хватило зависимостей, аргументов или файлов. Это не отзыв о поведении: наблюдать было не за чем.
scripts/archaeologist.py | не запустился: archaeologist.py: error: the following arguments are required: repo, file |
19 Oct 2026