CD coop-sync-testing
Build and test co-op sync with the hub's ready-made tools in tools/: an in-game RPC bridge and live inspector, hot reload of the mod core inside running games, a UDP chaos box for lag and loss, a flight recorder that finds the first desync and shrinks it to a regression test, a seeded co-op fuzzer with invariant oracles, an actor-ownership library with epochs, a fake world model, a lock and warm pool for running several game copies, JSON scenarios, co-op bots with playbooks, and an animation sync checker.
Build and test co-op sync with the hub's ready-made tools in tools/: an in-game RPC bridge and live inspector, hot reload of the mod core inside running…
As a process D 43/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: Build and test co-op sync with the hub's ready-made tools in tools… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value - warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 43/100
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 6 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 730 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)
- +4Structure: 1 headings, hard to scan
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 510: enough signal without eating the budget
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 54.