BF autonomy-type-based
Type-based autonomous task queue system. Categorizes tasks by type (research, writing, analysis, maintenance) and lets autonomy work only on value-add tasks while cron handles maintenance. Use when you want autonomous work on specific task types, maximize token efficiency, and maintain clear separation of concerns between autonomous work and scheduled maintenance.
Type-based autonomous task queue system.
As a process F 47/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: url
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-agent-memory-dumptemplates/HEARTBEAT.mdAgent memory / workspace files bundled with the skill (1) — likely a workspace dump with personal data or tokenstemplates/HEARTBEAT.md
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: url
Process rating: all ten parameters 47/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: url
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Steps. 58 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2419 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 12 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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)
- -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 366: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 25 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 58 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (19 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 77.