BF launch-nemo-rl
Playbook for launching, monitoring, stopping, and debugging NeMo-RL recipes on a Kubernetes cluster via the nrl-k8s CLI. Covers ephemeral vs long-lived RayCluster modes, iterating on runs, and debugging hung or failed training jobs.
Playbook for launching, monitoring, stopping, and debugging NeMo-RL recipes on a Kubernetes cluster via the nrl-k8s CLI.
As a process F 39/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: examples/configs/recipes/llm/..., examples/configs/recipes/llm/…, examples/nemo_gym/…
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Bash Read Grep Glob Edit Write
Files scanned: 1. 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: examples/configs/recipes/llm/... - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: examples/configs/recipes/llm/… - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: examples/nemo_gym/…
Process rating: all ten parameters 39/100
- 0Tools and files. 3 referenced file(s) missing: examples/configs/recipes/llm/..., examples/configs/recipes/llm/…, examples/nemo_gym/…
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 12 mutating operations with no state check
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4298 tokens
- 100Steps. 42 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 14 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (8 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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 232: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 42 items
- +4Has examples (14 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 59.