SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC org-design

Design organizational topology, talent, rewards, culture, and health decisions with explicit decision rights and validation. Do not use for legal advice, project delivery planning, financial modeling, or technology implementation. reporting structures), talent strategy (make-vs-buy, skill taxonomies, succession planning), compensation frameworks (market benchmarking, equity design, leveling), culture architecture (values codification, rituals, psychological safety), organizational health metrics (eNPS, retention risk, engagement surveys), DEI strategy (inclusive design, equitable systems, belonging).

magnus919/agent-skills Agent Skills author: magnus919 MIT 8 files body ≈ 834 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 26 h ago

Design organizational topology, talent, rewards, culture, and health decisions with explicit decision rights and validation.

As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches, progress reporting

AnalyzerData and analyticsResearchtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
98/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
96
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
62/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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 Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/culture-architecture.md:61
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      | **Debate** | Healthy disagreement structured into process | Red team / blue team reviews, pre-mortems |

    Files scanned: 7. 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 62/100

    • 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
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 75Steps. 3 steps
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 834 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • medium 5 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
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 607: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 7 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 3 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (5 of 5)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 96.