AF llm-judge
Use when comparing two or more code implementations against a spec or requirements doc. Triggers on "which repo is better", "compare these implementations", "evaluate both solutions", "rank these codebases", or "judge which approach wins". Also covers choosing between competing PRs or vendor submissions solving the same problem. Does NOT review a single codebase for quality — use code review skills instead. Does NOT evaluate strategy docs — use strategy-review. Requires a spec file and 2+ repo paths.
As a process F 56/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../../../beagle-core/skills/llm-artifacts-detection/SKILL.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../../../beagle-core/skills/llm-artifacts-detection/SKILL.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: ../../../beagle-core/skills/llm-artifacts-detection/SKILL.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 65Failures and branches. 3 branches
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 30 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2575 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 14 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 505: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 28 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 30 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (12 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 90.