SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC hive-mind

Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus and distributed coordination. Queen-led hierarchical swarm management with multiple consensus strategies. Use when: distributed coordination, fault-tolerant operations, multi-agent consensus, collective decision making. Skip when: single-agent tasks, simple operations, local-only work.

The skillemall take

Promises Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus for distributed coordination with queen-led hierarchy. One instruction file at 376 tokens, no scripts, no critical errors. Scores: quality 84, process 53, safety 100. No model runs or sandbox tests.

For multi-agent systems requiring fault tolerance, the skill offers a ready architecture. Catch: unclear which consensus strategies are actually implemented and how they scale. Low process score hints at limited automation. Install if you need agent coordination and don't mind figuring out implementation details yourself.

ruvnet/claude-flow Agent Skills author: ruvnet MIT 1 file body ≈ 376 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 29 h ago

Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus and distributed coordination.

As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

GeneratorAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: 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) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
53/100
Has gaps
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

The same skill appears in 1 more place: RA-Skills

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: 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 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
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 8 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 376 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

    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 321: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 11 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 8 items
    • +4Has examples (4 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.