CC managed-workflow
Discover and run bounded remote dynamic workflows with Ruflo mod policy, worker inspection and independent acceptance gates
Promises to run remote workflows with Ruflo policy control, worker inspection, and independent acceptance gates. Single instruction file at 1121 tokens, no scripts. Scores: safety 100, quality 64, process 61. No critical findings, lint clean.
In practice, this looks like a framework for task orchestration with checks at each stage. No model runs, no sandbox tests—unclear how it performs under load. Many platforms listed (Claude, Cursor, DeepSeek, etc.), but without real examples, applicability is hard to judge. Install if you need this exact workflow architecture with gates, but don't expect guarantees.
Discover and run bounded remote dynamic workflows with Ruflo mod policy, worker inspection and independent acceptance gates
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
The same skill appears in 1 more place: ruflo
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 7 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1121 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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)
- +4Structure: 2 headings, hard to scan
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 123: enough signal without eating the budget
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 7 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 64.