BC work-with-pr
Full PR lifecycle in a fresh task-owned git worktree: implement via the ulw-loop skill with mandatory evidence-bound manual QA → reviewer-readable English PR → verification loop (CI + Cubic, where Cubic is skipped only when its quota is exhausted) → merge by default → worktree cleanup. Decomposes one task into the smallest atomic, independently-mergeable PRs and builds the independent ones concurrently via one worktree per PR driven by parallel subagents or a team. Unbounded loop: any failing gate sends you back to fix-and-re-QA inside that PR's worktree. Use whenever implementation work needs to land as a PR. Triggers: 'create a PR', 'implement and PR', 'work on this and make a PR', 'implement issue', 'land this as a PR', 'split into atomic PRs', 'parallel PRs', 'work-with-pr', 'PR workflow', 'implement end to end', even when user just says 'implement X' if the context implies PR delivery.
Full PR lifecycle in a fresh task-owned git worktree: implement via the ulw-loop skill with mandatory evidence-bound manual QA → reviewer-readable English PR…
As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
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: 1. 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 63/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 29 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4400 tokens
- 85Steps. 10 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- high The skill tells the model to perform an irreversible action with no human approval
- low The response is described with custom markup (9 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)
- +3Description length 903: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 24 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +4Has examples (21 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.