BB disaster-recovery-plan
Write a disaster recovery plan for a service or system — covering RPO/RTO targets, failure scenario runbooks, backup and restore procedures, DR testing cadence, and communication templates. Use when asked to write a DR plan, document failover procedures, create recovery runbooks, define RTO/RPO targets, or prepare for a disaster recovery game day. Produces a full DR document with per-scenario recovery runbooks, backup validation procedures, testing schedule, and communication templates.
Write a disaster recovery plan for a service or system — covering RPO/RTO targets, failure scenario runbooks, backup and restore procedures, DR testing…
As a process B 67/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, failures and branches, running it twice
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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 · 3
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 3
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityskill-card.md:25Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Mitigation: Require security team involvement for breach or ransomware scenarios before restoring from backup or resuming normal operations. <br>
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:65Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Security breach / ransomware | Very low | Full outage + investigation | [4 hours] | [Last clean backup] | Section 3.5 |
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:332Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)### 3.5 Security Breach or Ransomware
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 5602 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 67/100
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 5602 tokens
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 51 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 11 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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 491: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 24 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 51 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (25 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 76.