SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC run-checks

Run the project's full verification gate: every check the project defines as a pass/fail condition, built from its CI config, check scripts, and configured tools, or from a formatter-linter-test baseline when it declares none. Use when the user asks to "run checks", "run the verification gate", "run lint and tests", "run the test suite", "check that this passes", "does this pass CI", or "run the project's checks".

tobihagemann/turbo Agent Skills author: tobihagemann MIT 1 file body ≈ 383 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 h ago

Run the project's full verification gate: every check the project defines as a pass/fail condition, built from its CI config, check scripts, and configured…

As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

AnalyzerSoftware developmenttype 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%
81
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
57/100
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: turbo

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 57/100

    • 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. 2 mutating operations with no state check
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 4 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 383 tokens

    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)
    • +4Structure: 1 headings, hard to scan
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 417: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 4 items

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.