CD weekly-planning
Every Monday last week's GTM work is ranked against active initiatives, declared infra, and live runs, as one reviewable pull request per initiative — or one workspace pull request when there are none. Triggers: "what should we work on this week", "rank our initiatives against what is actually running", "weekly GTM plan from the cadence log", "recommend next work from infra and runs", "the play is deployed but I don't think it ran". Cargo CDK, defineAgent, harness claudeCode, GitHub, cargo-ai CLI reads, initiatives, cadence. Skip when: you want today recapped and posted to Slack, which is standup; or you want call transcripts scribed into context, which is call-capture.
Every Monday last week's GTM work is ranked against active initiatives, declared infra, and live runs, as one reviewable pull request per initiative — or one…
As a process D 41/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: scripts/weekly-planning/package.json
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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: 11. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 5231 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/weekly-planning/package.json - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 41/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/weekly-planning/package.json
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 5231 tokens
- 100Steps. 34 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- 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 (11 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 678: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 34 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 68.