AC cut-mistakes
Agent 2 of the video editing pipeline. Finds and removes spoken mistakes — stutters, repeated words, false starts, and retakes (re-recorded lines) — from a talking-head recording. Use after cut-silences, when asked to cut mistakes, remove stutters / repeats / filler restarts, clean up flubs, or keep the best take. Works review-gated: it proposes every cut with context and a reason for approval, then renders only the approved cuts via ffmpeg. Requires a word-level transcript.
Agent 2 of the video editing pipeline.
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
The same skill appears in 1 more place: hyperframes-student-kit
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: 3. 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 53/100
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 7 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 924 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 479: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 7 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.