BC engineer-system-change
Evaluate and carry out non-trivial software-system changes from first principles. Use when assessing RFCs, issues, designs, features, refactors, migrations, dependency changes, or proposed fields, events, APIs, modules, and services whose need, consumers, system fit, validation, or rollback require scrutiny. Read the actual system, identify the concrete problem and named semantic consumers, choose the smallest sufficient solution, reject pseudo-requirements and speculative abstractions, and require evidence proportional to risk. Do not use for mechanical edits, source-code explanation, or a dedicated review of an already-complete diff.
Evaluate and carry out non-trivial software-system changes from first principles.
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, progress reporting
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
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 58 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2285 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
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 643: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 58 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.