AC freelance-rate-calculator
Compute the hourly rate, day rate, and monthly revenue target a freelancer needs to hit a specific take-home income, correctly accounting for unbillable hours, business expenses, self-employment tax, and profit margin — then convert that hourly rate into a fixed-price project quote with a scope-creep risk buffer. Built for freelancers, consultants, and AI agent operators pricing their own or an agent's billable time. Fills a gap next to freelance-proposal and freelance-income-tracking skills, which help you find and log work but don't tell you what to actually charge. Pure Python, no external API or account required.
Compute the hourly rate, day rate, and monthly revenue target a freelancer needs to hit a specific take-home income, correctly accounting for unbillable…
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
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
- 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
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 59/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 10 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 522 tokens
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 624: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 6 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 90.