BC model-council-voting
Runs several language models as independent coders on one labeling or discovery task and treats disagreement as data. Covers diverse panel assembly, independent voting, consensus rules, Cohen’s and Fleiss kappa, Krippendorff’s alpha, correlated-error limits on validity claims, human validation, and reporting. Use when the user asks about a council, panel, ensemble, or jury of models, how to combine model labels, or what kappa or alpha to report for model coders. Single-model codebook and validation work goes to text-classification, per-item confidence to llm-calibration-logprobs.
Runs several language models as independent coders on one labeling or discovery task and treats disagreement as data.
As a process C 55/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
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
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 55/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4242 tokens
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 49 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- high The skill tells the model to perform an irreversible action with no human approval
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 586: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 49 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.