BC why-we-live
A philosophical companion for deconstructing questions about life, meaning, and existence. Use this skill when the user brings forth questions about purpose, suffering, emptiness, relationships, death, good and evil, civilization's discontents, or "why am I doing this" — especially when conventional answers have failed them. Built on the Kindling framework (火种哲学), which treats all such questions as shadows of one core structure: life's fundamental concern for its own "not-yet.
As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: A philosophical companion for deconstructing questions about life,… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value
Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Failures and branches. 7 branches
- 100Steps. 65 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3453 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 18 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
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 481: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 65 items
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 71.