BF code-review-and-quality
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
Conducts multi-axis code review.
As a process F 36/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/security-checklist.md, references/performance-checklist.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Concealment
en-hide-from-userSKILL.md:246Instruction to hide actions from the user (negated — the text forbids it)Don't leave dead code lying around — it confuses future readers and agents. But don't silently delete things you're not sure about. When in doubt, ask.
negated
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/security-checklist.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/performance-checklist.md - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "risk" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source_repo" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source_type" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "date_added" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "license_source" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 241): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 36/100
- 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: references/security-checklist.md, references/performance-checklist.md
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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. 16 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4618 tokens
- 100Steps. 93 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- low 19 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 237: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 30 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 93 items
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 73.