SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD generate-custom-instructions-from-codebase

Migration and code evolution instructions generator for GitHub Copilot. Analyzes differences between two project versions (branches, commits, or releases) to create precise instructions allowing Copilot to maintain consistency during technology migrations, major refactoring, or framework version upgrades.

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github MIT 1 file body ≈ 2 071 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 31 h ago

Migration and code evolution instructions generator for GitHub Copilot.

As a process D 36/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: steps, result and completion, when it triggers

GeneratorGitHubSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: GitHub Copilot / VS Code Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
69
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
36/100
Unfinished process
Steps w 15
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

The same skill appears in 1 more place: RA-Skills

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
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 · 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 description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 19, 49, 116, 117, 118, 202): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

Process rating: all ten parameters 36/100

  • 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
  • 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
  • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2071 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)
  • +3No numbered steps or checklist
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 306: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 13 headings
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.