SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB intent-driven-development

Turn ambiguous or high-impact product and engineering changes into scoped, verifiable acceptance criteria before or alongside implementation. Use when a user asks to clarify a feature, define acceptance criteria, de-risk a security/data/migration/integration change, prepare implementation requirements for another agent, or make a complex request testable. Do not trigger for trivial edits, straightforward fixes, active debugging, code review, or implementation requests whose acceptance conditions are already clear unless the user explicitly invokes this skill.

affaan-m/everything-claude-code Agent Skills author: affaan-m MIT 1 file body ≈ 4 137 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 21 h ago

Turn ambiguous or high-impact product and engineering changes into scoped, verifiable acceptance criteria before or alongside implementation.

As a process B 71/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice, progress reporting

AnalyzerSoftware developmentAI and agentstype 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
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
87
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
71/100
Nearly there
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

The same skill appears in 1 more place: everything-claude-code

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 71/100

    • 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
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4137 tokens
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 65 steps
    • 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 565: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 21 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 65 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (5 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.