AF agentic-customer-success-skill
Create CompleteTech LLC customer success and account management artifacts for agentic development clients, including account profiles, contact maps, approved email/contact routing, meeting notes, follow-up trackers, health scorecards, relationship risk logs, renewal readiness, expansion briefs, QBRs, support escalations, satisfaction surveys, testimonial/referral plans, executive check-ins, at-risk recovery, offboarding, stakeholder changes, communication cadence, success criteria reviews, and post-launch adoption check-ins. Use after first contact, during delivery, after launch, and through renewal or expansion when Codex needs to manage customer relationships without inventing facts.
As a process F 40/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: assets/logo.png
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityREADME.md:110Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)This skill needs local filesystem access only for the documented renderer workflow. It reads bundled templates, references, examples, `assets/logo.png`, and user-provided Markdown or variables, then w
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:92Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Does not require network access, credential access, persistence, privilege escalation, or destructive file operations.
Files scanned: 19. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: assets/logo.png
Process rating: all ten parameters 40/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: assets/logo.png
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 100Steps. 44 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1782 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 10 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
- +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
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 694: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 44 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.