SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD observer

Monitor a session passively to infer the user's workflow from what actually happened, staying dormant until a trigger phrase activates observation for workflow-architect.

magnus919/agent-skills Agent Skills author: magnus919 MIT 3 files body ≈ 1 068 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 18 d ago

Monitor a session passively to infer the user's workflow from what actually happened, staying dormant until a trigger phrase activates observation for…

As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: references/active-workflow-discovery.md

ProcedureAI and agentsWriting and documentstype 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
B
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
79
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
49/100
Unfinished process
References files that are not bundled: references/active-workflow-discovery.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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 · 0

✓ No critical or high findings

Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/active-workflow-discovery.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/active-workflow-discovery.md
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: references/active-workflow-discovery.md
  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
  • 85Steps. 17 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1068 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
  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 170: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 6 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
  • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 79.