BC gh
Install and configure the GitHub CLI (gh) for AI agent environments where gh may not be pre-installed and git remotes use local proxies instead of github.com. Provides auto-install script with SHA256 verification and GITHUB_TOKEN auth with anonymous fallback. Use when gh command not found, shutil.which("gh") returns None, need GitHub API access (issues, PRs, releases, workflow runs), or repository operations fail with "failed to determine base repo" error. Documents required -R flag for all gh commands in proxy environments. Includes project management: GitHub Projects V2 (gh project), milestones (REST API), issue stories (lifecycle and templates), and label taxonomy management.
Install and configure the GitHub CLI (gh) for AI agent environments where gh may not be pre-installed and git remotes use local proxies instead of github.com.…
As a process C 50/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenreferences/projects-v2.md:137High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)upda…lue(input: { -
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenscripts/github_project_setup.py:496High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)"mutation { upda…lue(input: {"quoted
Files scanned: 7. 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 50/100
- 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 (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 85Steps. 17 steps, 3 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1809 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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)
- -32 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 687: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 88.