BC negative-contrastive-framing
Defines concepts, quality criteria, and boundaries by showing what they are NOT -- using anti-goals, near-miss examples, and failure patterns to create crisp decision criteria where positive definitions alone are ambiguous. Use when clarifying fuzzy boundaries, defining quality criteria, teaching by counterexample, preventing common mistakes, setting design guardrails, disambiguating similar concepts, refining requirements through anti-patterns, or when user mentions near-miss examples, anti-goals, what not to do, negative examples, counterexamples, or boundary clarification.
Defines concepts, quality criteria, and boundaries by showing what they are NOT -- using anti-goals, near-miss examples, and failure patterns to create crisp…
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — 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 · 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 61/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 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
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 54 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1408 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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 582: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 7 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 54 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.