SKILLEMALL.ai

AC git-workflow-expert

Git branching strategies, conflict resolution, rebase workflows, monorepo patterns, and advanced operations like cherry-pick, bisect, and reflog recovery. Activate on "git", "branching strategy", "merge conflict", "rebase", "cherry-pick", "monorepo git", "git bisect", "git reflog", "squash commits". NOT for GitHub Actions CI/CD (use github-actions-pipeline-builder), GitHub API/webhooks, or PR review processes (use code-review-checklist).

curiositech/some_claude_skills Agent Skills author: curiositech 4 files body ≈ 3 109 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 38 min ago

Git branching strategies, conflict resolution, rebase workflows, monorepo patterns, and advanced operations like cherry-pick, bisect, and reflog recovery.

As a process C 64/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

ProcedureGitHubSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
95
Quality 40%
97
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
64/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

What is at stake

Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.

Broad scope medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

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.

For the author

Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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-tools SKILL.md:1
      Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bash
      allowed-tools: Read Write Edit Bash Grep Glob

    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 64/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 26 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100Steps. 28 steps
    • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3109 tokens
    • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

    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

    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 8 example trigger phrases
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 441: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 28 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
    • +4Has examples (11 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 97.