SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BF context-creation

The brownfield back-fill. Routed to by /create-context, and by startup when .codearbiter/CONTEXT.md lacks the <!--INITIALIZED--> body marker but source code exists. Six gated phases — pre-flight, scout dispatch, synthesis, gap interview, write, lock. Reads the existing codebase through parallel scouts, drafts every surviving project-state doc, resolves gaps with the user, and locks the project as initialized.

arbiterForge/codeArbiter Agent Skills author: arbiterForge AGPL-3.0 1 file body ≈ 3 930 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 25 h ago

The brownfield back-fill.

As a process F 42/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../../hooks/_releaselib.py, ../../includes/cut-docs.md

GeneratorSoftware developmenttype 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
90/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
75
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
42/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: ../../hooks/_releaselib.py, ../../includes/cut-docs.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: context-creation (arbiterForge/codeArbiter)

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../../hooks/_releaselib.py
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../../includes/cut-docs.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 42/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: ../../hooks/_releaselib.py, ../../includes/cut-docs.md
  • 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: ../../hooks/_releaselib.py, ../../includes/cut-docs.md
  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 10 mutating operations with no state check
  • 85Steps. 31 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Failures and branches. 3 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3930 tokens
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low The response is described with custom markup (4 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 412: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 9 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 31 items
  • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.