SKILLEMALL.ai

BF singlecell-qc

Use when designing, reviewing, or implementing single-cell RNA-seq QC in Python or R with a human-in-the-loop, data-driven approach. Trigger for scRNA QC metrics, per-sample diagnosis, threshold discussion, mitochondrial/ambient/doublet assessment, MAD vs fixed cutoffs, or refactoring automated merge-first QC. The analyst confirms key decisions at each step—agents must inspect data, propose options, and wait for approval before filtering, doublet removal, or merging. Not a turnkey pipeline skill.

xuzhougeng/wisp-science Agent Skills author: xuzhougeng AGPL-3.0 14 files · 2 scripts body ≈ 1 444 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 7 d ago

Trigger for scRNA QC metrics, per-sample diagnosis, threshold discussion, mitochondrial/ambient/doublet assessment, MAD vs fixed cutoffs, or refactoring…

As a process F 33/100 · No process to follow — References files that are not bundled: assets/gene_sets/*

AnalyzerData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
85
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
33/100
No process to follow
References files that are not bundled: assets/gene_sets/*
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

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 · 0

✓ No critical or high findings

Files scanned: 13. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: assets/gene_sets/*
  • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 142, 159): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

Process rating: all ten parameters 33/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: assets/gene_sets/*
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: assets/gene_sets/*
  • 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
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
  • 100Steps. 28 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1444 tokens
  • low 12 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
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 501: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 14 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
  • +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
  • +3All 2 scripts are documented

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.