SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC launch

When the user wants to plan a product launch, feature announcement, or release strategy. Also use when the user mentions 'launch,' 'Product Hunt,' 'feature release,' 'announcement,' 'go-to-market,' 'beta launch,' 'early access,' 'waitlist,' 'product update,' 'how do I launch this,' 'site launch,' 'go live,' 'pre-launch QA,' 'launch checklist,' 'GTM plan,' 'we're about to ship,' 'changelog,' 'release notes,' or 'what did we ship this week.' Use this whenever someone is preparing to release something publicly. For ongoing marketing after launch, see marketing-ideas. For the offer being launched (bonuses, guarantees, scarcity, naming), see offers.

coreyhaines31/marketingskills Agent Skills author: coreyhaines31 MIT 4 files body ≈ 3 741 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

When the user wants to plan a product launch, feature announcement, or release strategy.

As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureWriting and documentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
79
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
54/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 9): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100

    • 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
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 10 mutating operations with no state check
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 85Steps. 150 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3741 tokens
    • low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low No test case covers injection arriving through data

    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
    • +4No input/output examples
    • -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 652: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 31 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 150 items
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 79.