SKILLEMALL.ai

BC nist-cps

Knowledge base from the NIST Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems (SP 1500-201/202/203, v1.0, 2017). Use for engineering and analyzing cyber-physical systems (CPS) and IoT: the CPS Framework's aspect × facet grid (nine aspects of concern examined through conceptualization, realization, and assurance facets), cross-property trustworthiness risk management (safety/security/privacy/reliability/resilience together), data interoperability (syntactical/semantic/contextual, canonical models, identifiers, provenance), the timing aspect (time-interval classes, time domains, time-aware networking) and secure/resilient time (GNSS jamming/spoofing, PTP/NTP attacks, holdover, the clock-error model and Allan/MTIE metrics), plus the use-case requirements method. Bridges IT and OT under a clock. Scope limits: a 2017 living/draft document, thin on post-2017 standards and on detailed control catalogs; it names but does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 and 15288 process text or permission-licensed third-party figures.

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs Agent Skills author: jgsystemsconsulting 14 files body ≈ 3 607 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 h ago

Knowledge base from the NIST Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems (SP 1500-201/202/203, v1.0, 2017). Use for engineering and analyzing cyber-physical systems…

As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, running it twice

ReferenceData and analyticsAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
91/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
78
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
63/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
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: 14. 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 63/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 58 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3607 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)
    • +3Description length 1014: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Structure: 14 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 58 items
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 78.