BB skill-logger
Logs and scores skill usage quality, tracking output effectiveness, user satisfaction signals, and improvement opportunities. Expert in skill analytics, quality metrics, feedback loops, and continuous improvement. Activate on "skill logging", "skill quality", "skill analytics", "skill scoring", "skill performance", "skill metrics", "track skill usage", "skill improvement". NOT for creating skills (use agent-creator), skill documentation (use skill-coach), or runtime debugging (use debugger skills).
Logs and scores skill usage quality, tracking output effectiveness, user satisfaction signals, and improvement opportunities.
As a process B 67/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
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.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Write Edit Bash Grep Glob
Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 460): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 67/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 13 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3213 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 11 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
- -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 8 example trigger phrases
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 503: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 28 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 13 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (12 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.