BF write-a-spec
Scope a feature end to end and write an implementation spec under specs/ from an accepted proposal — current-system mapping, goals/non-goals, a Decision Log for one-way-door choices, a live Open Questions backlog, and a real migration + test plan. Read when asked to write a spec, scope this feature, turn this proposal into a spec, plan the implementation, or break this into tasks. Do NOT fire on frame a proposal or write the PRD (sibling frame-a-proposal — a PRD frames a change before it is accepted; this skill starts once one is), record a decision or write the ADR (record-a-decision), write a postmortem (write-a-postmortem), or review this design (review-a-design) — those are separate skills. Complements the platform open-knowledge skill; does not replace it.
Scope a feature end to end and write an implementation spec under specs/ from an accepted proposal — current-system mapping, goals/non-goals, a Decision Log…
As a process F 50/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: proposals/0004-payment-retries.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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
missing-refreference to a missing file: proposals/0004-payment-retries.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 50/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: proposals/0004-payment-retries.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 16 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4659 tokens
- 85Steps. 57 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 15 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 771: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 16 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 57 items
- +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 78.