SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AD project-sizing-guide

Software project effort estimation assistant. Outputs three-point estimates (optimistic/most-likely/pessimistic values with confidence intervals), T-shirt sizes, or Function Point Analysis (FPA) counts. Triggered when users ask 'how long will this feature take,' need to assess project workload, perform PERT estimation, T-shirt sizing, FPA, sprint planning, or quote-based effort breakdowns.

zebbern/claude-code-guide Agent Skills author: zebbern 3 files · 1 script body ≈ 2 947 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

Software project effort estimation assistant.

As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureData and analyticsWriting and documentsOperations 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
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
88
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
49/100
Unfinished process
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

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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 162, 176, 195): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100

    • 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. 3 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Steps. 56 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2947 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

    • +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 392: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 26 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 56 items
    • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 88.