SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC cto-advisor

Technical leadership guidance for engineering teams, architecture decisions, and technology strategy. Includes tech debt analyzer, team scaling calculator, engineering metrics frameworks, technology evaluation tools, and ADR templates. Use when assessing technical debt, scaling engineering teams, evaluating technologies, making architecture decisions, establishing engineering metrics, or when user mentions CTO, tech debt, technical debt, team scaling, architecture decisions, technology evaluation, engineering metrics, DORA metrics, or technology strategy.

modbender/skill-library-mcp Agent Skills author: modbender MIT 6 files body ≈ 2 224 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 d ago

Technical leadership guidance for engineering teams, architecture decisions, and technology strategy.

As a process C 51/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: OpenClaw 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) Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
97/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
51/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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: 6. 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 51/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 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
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 174 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2224 tokens
    • 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)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 561: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 63 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 174 items
    • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +3All 2 scripts are documented
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.