SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC weekly-planner

File-based weekly planning system (TOML) with inbox capture, time-block scheduling, weekly review, and optional calendar publishing (Google Calendar via gogcli or .ics export). Use when a user asks to plan or time-block a week, triage an inbox of tasks, roll over unfinished work, run a weekly review, or publish a weekly schedule to a calendar. Do NOT use for full project-management tools (Jira/Linear/etc.) unless explicitly requested.

modbender/skill-library-mcp Agent Skills author: modbender MIT 18 files body ≈ 1 897 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 d ago

File-based weekly planning system (TOML) with inbox capture, time-block scheduling, weekly review, and optional calendar publishing (Google Calendar via…

As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

ProcedureJiraPersonal productivitytype 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
98/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
95
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
63/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Running it twice w 4
30
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: 18. 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 63/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 30Running it twice. 23 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 85Steps. 69 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1897 tokens
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress

    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
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 438: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 22 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 69 items
    • +4Has examples (11 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 95.