SKILLEMALL.ai

AC slang-shader-engineer

Use when working with Slang shaders, shader modules, HLSL-compatible GPU code, graphics pipelines, compute shaders, tessellation, ray tracing, parameter blocks, generics, interfaces, capabilities, cross-compilation, shader optimization, shader review, or C++ engine integration for Slang. Trigger on any mention of Slang, .slang files, slangc, SPIR-V from Slang, Slang modules, [shader("compute")], [shader("vertex")], or requests to write/review/refactor shader code with modern language features. Also trigger for Slang-to-HLSL/GLSL/Metal/CUDA cross-compile questions, or when the user says "shader" alongside "generics", "interfaces", "parameter blocks", "autodiff", or "capabilities".

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github MIT 4 files body ≈ 1 619 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com analyzed 31 h ago

Use when working with Slang shaders, shader modules, HLSL-compatible GPU code, graphics pipelines, compute shaders, tessellation, ray tracing, parameter…

As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
97/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
93
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
59/100
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
    • 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: 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 59/100

    • 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
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 56 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1619 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

    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

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 8 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 688: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 8 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 56 items
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 93.