BF ulw-research
Runs maximum-saturation research with a cooperating team, claim-graph gating, and a cited, QA'd deliverable. Use when the user explicitly asks for research or a deep investigation, including any 'ulw' research wording.
Runs maximum-saturation research with a cooperating team, claim-graph gating, and a cited, QA'd deliverable.
As a process F 61/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/planning.md
The same skill appears in 1 more place: oh-my-openagent
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 12638 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/planning.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: references/planning.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 21 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 12638 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 75 steps
- 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
- 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
- low 15 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (23 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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 218: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 23 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 75 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.