CF pcb
pcb; pcb modify/resume/reprice/package: design and verify editable KiCad boards, JLCPCB manufacturing bundles, and assembly pricing with supplier review.
pcb; pcb modify/resume/reprice/package: design and verify editable KiCad boards, JLCPCB manufacturing bundles, and assembly pricing with supplier review.
As a process F 33/100 · No process to follow — References files that are not bundled: templates/jlcpcb-2layer/
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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: 23. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/jlcpcb-2layer/
Process rating: all ten parameters 33/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: templates/jlcpcb-2layer/
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (pcb) differs from the folder (pcbclaw)
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Steps. 9 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2257 tokens
- 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 (4 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)
- +4Structure: 2 headings, hard to scan
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 153: enough signal without eating the budget
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 9 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (11 of 11)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 66.