SKILLEMALL.ai

CD ai-code-review-autonomous

Expert guide for multi-pass autonomous AI code self-review — syntax validation, logic correctness, architectural conformance, security audit, and performance analysis without external tooling — enabling the agent to catch its own errors before presenting code / Panduan ahli review kode otonom multi-pass oleh AI — validasi sintaks, kebenaran logika, konformitas arsitektur, audit keamanan, dan analisis performa tanpa tooling eksternal — memungkinkan agen menangkap errornya sendiri sebelum menampilkan kode.

roedyrustam/vibes-plug Agent Skills author: roedyrustam MIT 1 file body ≈ 2 797 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 55 min ago

Expert guide for multi-pass autonomous AI code self-review — syntax validation, logic correctness, architectural conformance, security audit, and performance…

As a process D 43/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
C
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
72
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
43/100
Unfinished process
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

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
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: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")

Process rating: all ten parameters 43/100

  • 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. 2 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (read) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 100Steps. 31 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2797 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
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 509: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 24 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 31 items
  • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.