BF migration-engineering
Plan and execute safe cross-system migrations, including service extraction from monoliths. Use when moving data, schemas, interfaces, infrastructure, or service ownership through compatibility windows, dual-running, reconciliation, cutover, recovery, or deprecation. Do not use for deciding whether decomposition is justified, designing a target architecture, or implementing one named technology; route those to the relevant architecture or specialist skill.
Plan and execute safe cross-system migrations, including service extraction from monoliths.
As a process F 47/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../data-engineering/SKILL.md, ../api-design-and-evolution/SKILL.md, ../software-architecture/SKILL.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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: 13. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../data-engineering/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../api-design-and-evolution/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../software-architecture/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../platform-engineering/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../release-engineering/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../site-reliability-engineering/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../implementation-planning/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../secure-software-engineering/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../qa-methodology/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../verification-methodology/SKILL.md - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 24): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 47/100
- 0Tools and files. 10 referenced file(s) missing: ../data-engineering/SKILL.md, ../api-design-and-evolution/SKILL.md, ../software-architecture/SKILL.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 2 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
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 85Steps. 8 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2858 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- 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 460: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 8 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 77.