AC chief-of-staff-methodology
Prepare accountable executive decisions, decision support, briefings, information triage, calendar choices, and institutional memory. Use for chief of staff or CoS, executive operations, founder operations, operating rhythm, strategic attention, executive office, board materials, organizational sensing, team health, leadership transitions, gatekeeping, decision memos, executive briefing, strategic time, attention allocation, calendar triage, or meeting audits for a solo operator or organization. Do not use for generic personal assistance, employee surveillance, inferred commitments, automatic task mutation, meeting facilitation, org structure design, or business operating-process design; route to the owning specialist.
Prepare accountable executive decisions, decision support, briefings, information triage, calendar choices, and institutional memory.
As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
How to improve
- 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: 9. 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
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 15 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
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 29 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2495 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 14 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- medium 8 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"
- low No test case covers injection arriving through data
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
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 728: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (7 of 7)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.