BD quant-validation
The methods a financial-ML result has to survive before it is evidence — purged cross-validation with an embargo, triple-barrier labelling, sample uniqueness under overlapping labels, fractional differentiation, meta-labelling, and multiple-testing correction. Written because the invariants were required of quant-researcher and nothing in the project explained how to satisfy them: a rule without a method produces either an invention or a block. Applied whenever a backtest, a feature or a label is being designed or judged.
The methods a financial-ML result has to survive before it is evidence — purged cross-validation with an embargo, triple-barrier labelling, sample uniqueness…
As a process D 44/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: steps, result and completion, inputs and preconditions
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: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "effort" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "paths"
Process rating: all ten parameters 44/100
- 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
- 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
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1649 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
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)
- +3No numbered steps or checklist
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 527: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.