CC weekly-review
Look back at the past week and set up the next one: calendar, mail, goals and files in one page, with a short plan. Use when the user asks for a weekly review, a week in review, "how did my week go" or to plan next week.
The skill promises to gather your week into one page: calendar, mail, goals, and files with a short plan for next week. Triggers on "how did my week go" or "plan next week" requests.
Files contain 506 tokens, one instruction, no scripts. Tests show grade C (quality 69, process 62), no critical errors. No sandbox or model runs. Supports all major platforms: Claude, Cursor, Gemini, and others.
In practice, you'll get roughly what's described, but no guarantees on data completeness or output structure—the instruction relies on your agent's judgment. Install if a basic weekly summary without precision demands suits you.
Look back at the past week and set up the next one: calendar, mail, goals and files in one page, with a short plan.
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, 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
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: Look back at the past week and set up the next one: calendar, mail… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "channel"
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 10 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 506 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 220: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 4 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.