AB my-failure-museum
Turn a mistake into a reusable lesson — a short, unsentimental 'here's what happened and the rule so it doesn't happen again' entry you can actually keep. Use when asked help me learn from this mistake, I keep making the same error, capture this lesson, or turn this failure into something useful. Produces an honest, blame-free autopsy of what happened, the real root cause (not the surface one), the specific rule or trigger that prevents a repeat, and a one-line entry for your growing 'failure museum' — because unexamined mistakes repeat and examined ones compound into wisdom.
Turn a mistake into a reusable lesson — a short, unsentimental 'here's what happened and the rule so it doesn't happen again' entry you can actually keep.
As a process B 72/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, running it twice, progress reporting
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 72/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 28 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 807 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 582: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (0 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.