AC webhook-automation
Event-driven webhook workflows with HMAC verification, retry logic, and multi-provider patterns. Use when: (1) receiving webhooks from GitHub, Stripe, Slack, or any provider, (2) building automated pipelines that react to external events, (3) validating webhook signatures and filtering spoofed requests, (4) retrying failed deliveries with exponential backoff, (5) routing webhook payloads to different handlers based on event type. Triggers on: webhook, endpoint, HMAC, signature, GitHub webhook, Stripe webhook, Slack events, webhooks, receive webhook, verify signature, retry failed.
As a process C 64/100 · 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: 4. 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 64/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 27 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3549 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 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
- +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
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 587: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 27 items
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.