AC code-review
Complete code review workflow for GitCode PRs. Combines automated security scanning with manual code review, outputs formatted findings, and posts comments to PR. Use when reviewing GitCode pull requests - follows 5-step process: automated scan, manual review, issue selection, formatted output, and optional PR comment posting.
As a process C 60/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, consistency
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: 7. 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: Complete code review workflow for GitCode PRs. Combines automated … ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value
Process rating: all ten parameters 60/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (code-review) differs from the folder (code-review-for-gitcode)
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 83 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3313 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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)
- -214 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 328: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 24 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 83 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (18 code blocks)
- +3All 4 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 78.