BD writing-defect-reports
Establish a finding before you publish it, and correct it after — headlines that overstate what actually reproduces at the layer a user sees, reporting code that no entry point can reach or that is already dead, filing a caveat the project's own records already answered, re-verifying your prior notes against the tree instead of against the note, choosing the narrowest injection point that reproduces a failure without breaking the run first, capturing probe output a harness swallows, and withdrawing a published claim in the thread where you published it. Use when filing an issue, writing the body of a PR or code review that asserts a defect, triaging someone else's report, or deciding whether a suspicious observation is reportable at all.
Establish a finding before you publish it, and correct it after — headlines that overstate what actually reproduces at the layer a user sees, reporting code…
As a process D 42/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Concealment
en-hide-from-userSKILL.md:173Instruction to hide actions from the user (negated — the text forbids it)- Do not quietly delete it and re-file a corrected version elsewhere; readers who
negated
Files scanned: 1. 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 42/100
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (writing-defect-reports) differs from the folder (defect-reports)
- 75Steps. 3 steps
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2841 tokens
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- high The skill tells the model to perform an irreversible action with no human approval
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 747: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 3 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.