SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CC experiment-bridge

Workflow 1.5: Bridge between idea discovery and auto review. Reads EXPERIMENT_PLAN.md, implements experiment code, deploys to GPU, collects initial results. Use when user says "实现实验", "implement experiments", "bridge", "从计划到跑实验", "deploy the plan", or has an experiment plan ready to execute.

wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep Claude Code author: wanshuiyin MIT 1 file body ≈ 4 681 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 h ago

Workflow 1.5: Bridge between idea discovery and auto review. Reads EXPERIMENTPLAN.md, implements experiment code, deploys to GPU, collects initial results.…

As a process C 69/100 · Has gaps — References files that are not bundled: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, ../shared-references/output-versioning.md, ../shared-references/output-manifest.md

ProcedureSoftware developmentInfrastructuretype 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
C
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
95
Quality 40%
80
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
69/100
Has gaps
References files that are not bundled: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, ../shared-references/output-versioning.md, ../shared-references/output-manifest.md
Tools and files w 18
0
When it triggers w 12
50
Inputs and preconditions w 11
70
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: experiment-bridge (wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep)

What is at stake

Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.

Broad scope medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.

For the author

Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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 · 1

✓ No critical or high findings

Medium and low: 1
  • medium Broad scope meta-broad-allowed-tools SKILL.md:1
    Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bash(*)
    allowed-tools: Bash(*) Read Write Edit Grep Glob Skill mcp__codex__codex mcp__codex__codex-reply mcp__antigravity__antigravity mcp__antigravity__antigravity-reply mcp__grok__grok mcp__grok__grok-reply

Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../shared-references/output-versioning.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../shared-references/output-manifest.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../shared-references/output-language.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: templates/RESEARCH_CONTRACT_TEMPLATE.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 69/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, ../shared-references/output-versioning.md, ../shared-references/output-manifest.md
  • 0Tools and files. 5 referenced file(s) missing: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, ../shared-references/output-versioning.md, ../shared-references/output-manifest.md
  • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
  • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4681 tokens
  • 85Steps. 77 steps, 2 vague phrases
  • 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
  • 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • 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

  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
  • +3Description length 292: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 17 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 77 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (12 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.