SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC weekly-retro

Use when the user is closing an ISO week, reviewing planned outcomes against evidence, interviewing work Areas, resolving unfinished commitments, or asking for "ретро", "weekly retro", "week review", or lessons from the week.

serejaris/personal-corp-os Agent Skills author: serejaris MIT 3 files body ≈ 5 415 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Use when the user is closing an ISO week, reviewing planned outcomes against evidence, interviewing work Areas, resolving unfinished commitments, or asking…

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

AnalyzerGitHubSoftware developmentLearningOperations and projectstype 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
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
79
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
53/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning body-long SKILL.md body ≈ 5415 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/
  • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 369): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

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
  • 30Running it twice. 25 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
  • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
  • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 5415 tokens
  • 85Steps. 75 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
  • low The response is described with custom markup (6 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

  • +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
  • +5Description quotes 2 example trigger phrases
  • +3Description length 225: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 26 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 75 items
  • +4Has examples (13 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 79.