AB checker
QA and peer review agent. Reviews output from other agents before delivery. Use when: (1) content from Scribe needs review before posting, (2) research from Scout needs validation before acting on it, (3) outreach messages need a quality check before sending, (4) any deliverable needs a second pair of eyes before it reaches Honey B or goes public. NOT for: creating content (use scribe), doing research (use scout), generating images (use pixel), doing maintenance/cleanup (use janitor). Checker REVIEWS, doesn't create. Don't use for internal drafts or brainstorming — only for pre-delivery QA. Outputs: review verdicts saved to artifacts/checker/.
QA and peer review agent.
As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches, running it twice
How to improve
- 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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. 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 68/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 39 steps
- 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 702 tokens
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
- -4Absolute local paths (C:\Users, /home/…): not portable
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 651: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.