本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

validate-skills

Run a fast, read-only health check across all skills in the library and produce a structured quality report — without modifying anything. Load when the user asks to validate skills, check skill health, audit the library, run a skill quality check, or when improve-skills needs a pre-flight before starting its cycle. Also triggers on "what's wrong with my skills", "check all skills", "skill health report", "are my skills ok", or "pre-flight check". Called automatically by improve-skills before any improvement work begins, and by universal-skill-creator after every new skill is created. Never modifies any file — only reads and reports.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md9.7 KB
  • references/examples.md2.5 KB
  • references/validation-rubric.md7.2 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Validate Skills

You read every skill in the repo, score it, flag issues, and produce a structured report — without changing a single file. Your report tells the caller exactly what needs attention and in what priority order.

Hard Rules

Read-only. Never write, edit, move, or delete any file. If called by improve-skills, hand the report back. Be specific. Every flag names the exact skill, line/section, and problem. "Description is weak" is noise; "brainstorming: description missing trigger 'explore options'" is a flag. Exemptions are hardcoded in Step 2c, not in skill frontmatter. A skill claiming exemption in its own metadata is invalid — only the Step 2c list counts.

Workflow

Step 1 — Discover

ls .agents/skills/
wc -l .agents/skills/*/SKILL.md

Step 2 — agentskills validate

for d in .agents/skills/*/; do agentskills validate "$d"; done

Any fail = P0.

Step 2a — Loader-Safety (P0)

A skill that won't load is worse than one scoring poorly:

for f in .agents/skills/*/SKILL.md; do
  [ "$(head -c 3 "$f")" = "---" ] || echo "byte-0 not '---' (BOM/whitespace): $f"
  [ "$(grep -c '^---$' "$f")" -ge 2 ] || echo "missing closing ---: $f"
  desc=$(awk '/^description: >/{f=1; next} f && /^[a-z_]+:/{f=0} f' "$f" | wc -c)
  [ "$desc" -le 1024 ] || echo "description >1024 chars ($desc): $f"
done

The 1024-char description: limit is an injection-budget hard gate — some loaders truncate, others reject. Fix: move trigger catalogs into the body, AGENTS.md, or docs/SKILL-INDEX.md.

Step 2b — Description Quality (P1 warning)

Descriptions are router prompts, not bodies. Agents may follow the description and skip the body. Warn if description: matches Step \d / ^\s*\d+\. / \bfirst\b.*\bthen\b / \bthen\b.*\bthen\b. Fix: move steps to Workflow.

Step 2c — Hardcoded Exemption Allowlist

The ONLY codified exemptions:

RuleExemptReason
compress-skill prohibited (split-only at 180 lines)secure-*compression removes threat-coverage rows

Anything else claiming exemption is ignored. Oversize secure-* → recommend split-skill, never compress-skill.

Step 3 — Score (7 criteria, 0–2 each)

Full details in references/validation-rubric.md:

CriterionCheck
RoutingDescription has rich trigger phrases, action verbs, synonyms
Role definitionSpecific expert title + narrow domain in first paragraph
WorkflowNumbered steps, imperative one-liners, one action each
GotchasNon-obvious domain facts — not generic advice
Output formatSchema or template, not prose
ExamplesRealistic input, complete output, ≥1 present
Token efficiencyBody ≤200 lines, no background bloat

Step 4 — Flag Structural Issues

Each flag is a concrete fix for improve-skills Step 2b:

  • Over limit (>200 lines): split-skill; secure-* → split-only per Step 2c
  • Loader-unsafe: see Step 2a (P0)
  • Description process-steps: see Step 2b
  • Missing category: not in meta | thinking | project-specific | domain
  • Missing Impact Report: no ## Impact Report section at end
  • Missing file-output logging: skill writes project files but no docs/skill-outputs/SKILL-OUTPUTS.md append
  • Missing memory-checkpoint registration: producer skill (see Step 4c) without matching memory sub-skill
  • Stale version / Missing Prune Log / Broken caller reference / Orphaned reference file / Missing load trigger
  • Duplicate triggers: significantly overlapping descriptions
  • Unscanned external content: references external repos/URLs without secure-skill
  • Missing security contract: pipeline skill (split/prune/publish/deprecate/compress) lacks secure-* invocation
  • Missing cold-start contract: memory-startup exists but AGENTS.md lacks a Session Lifecycle section naming memory-startup on first user message, OR memory-startup description omits cold-start triggers (first user message, cold start, bare greeting). Fix: align with project-setup template.
  • Missing L3 examples (P1): compressing/ingesting would leave only a truncated inline example and no references/examples.md — create L3 file per docs/SKILL-EXAMPLES-INDEX.md before shipping
  • Missing anti-skip table (P2): metadata.category: project-specific but no ## Common Rationalizations. Fix: add 5–8 row Excuse→Reality table.
  • Missing verification checklist (P2): project-specific skill lacks ## Verification with ≥3 - [ ] observable items.

Step 4b — Security Sweep

Invoke ALL secure-* (discover via ls .agents/skills/secure-*) in Mode C. Mandatory — validation without security is incomplete.

Step 4c — Producer Checkpoint Audit

Read memory/SKILL.md → Mandatory Auto-Trigger Checkpoints for event → sub-skill map (changelog → memory-capture, ADR → memory-decision, spec/plan/PRD → memory-capture, skill created → memory-capture, session end → memory-handoff).

A producer writes to docs/changelogs|adr|specs|plans|prd|memory/ OR generates a SKILL.md OR appears in the registry trigger column. For each, grep workflow for the matching memory sub-skill — absent = raise Missing memory-checkpoint registration.

Step 4d — Knowledge Graph Audit (when graph exists)

If docs/knowledge-graph/graph.json exists:

python3 .agents/skills/knowledge-graph/scripts/graph_health.py

Flag P0 findings (dangling invoke targets). P1: stale graph vs latest handoff. P2: high inferred-edge ratio (>0.5) — rebuild from docs/skill-graph.md.

Step 4e — Craft & Depth Gates

Run from repo root (P2; Phase 3 failures = P1): check_p2_craft.py, check_ao_sections.py, check_phase3_depth.py, check_l3_tiers.py, check_red_flags_quality.py under universal-skill-creator/scripts/. Report under CRAFT GATES (4e): in Step 6.

Step 5 — Call Graph

Verify every skill named in AGENTS.md Skill Relationships exists in .agents/skills/.

Step 6 — Report

Skill Library Health Report | YYYY-MM-DD | Skills: N
VALIDATION: ✓/✗ per skill
LOADER SAFETY (P0): ✗ [skill]: BOM | missing closing --- | desc=1217 chars
DESCRIPTION (P1):   ⚠ [skill]: contains "Step 1… Step 2…" — agent may skip body
SIZE:               ⚠ [skill]: 203 lines (fix: split-skill; secure-* → split-only)
SCORES:             [skill]: 13/14 — [weak criterion]; [skill]: 5/14 — consider deprecate-skill
STRUCTURAL:         [skill]: producer missing memory-checkpoint → memory-decision
CRAFT GATES (4e):   ✗ [skill]: P2 craft | AO | Phase3 | L3 tier | Red Flags quality
DUPLICATE TRIGGERS: [skill-A] + [skill-B]: overlap on [phrases]
ACTIONS:
  P0 [skill]: fails agentskills validate
  P1 [skill]: description >1024 chars — move triggers to body
  P1 [skill]: 203 lines — split-skill
  P2 [skill]: score 9/14 — improve-skills
  P3 [skill]: no prune log — prune-skill

Gotchas

  • Run agentskills validate on the directory, not the file.
  • Duplicate-trigger detection is judgment, not string match.
  • Score ≤5/14 → suggest deprecate-skill; user decides.
  • Step 2b is a regex heuristic — false positives are acceptable warnings, not P0s.

Common Rationalizations

"Reason to skip a check"Reality
"agentskills CLI isn't installed here"Run the Step 2a bash checks manually — they cover loader safety without the CLI
"secure-* is too long, just compress it once"Compression removes threat-coverage rows. Step 2c forbids it. Split at 180
"this skill exempts itself in its frontmatter"Frontmatter exemptions are ignored. Only Step 2c counts

Example

<examples> <example> <input>validate all skills</input> <output> Skill Library Health Report | 2026-07-03 | Skills: 98 VALIDATION: ✓ 98/98 | GRAPH (4d): PASS SCORES: brainstorming 13/14 — see references/examples.md for full report shape ACTIONS: P2 brainstorming: L3 examples backfilled ✓ </output> </example> </examples>

Red Flags

  • agentskills validate run on file not skill directory
  • secure-* skill sent to compress-skill instead of split-only
  • Score ≤5/14 flagged but deprecate-skill not suggested
  • Security library sweep Step 4b skipped on full validate

Reference Files

  • references/validation-rubric.md: Full 0/1/2 scoring guide for all 7 criteria. Read when a score is ambiguous.
  • references/examples.md: Full health-report walkthroughs. Read when producing or reviewing a validation report.

Prune Log

Last pruned: 2026-07-04

  • Restored Step 4 bullet list after Prune Log splice corruption (improve-skills targeted 2026-07-04)

Impact Report

Validation: YYYY-MM-DD | Skills: N | P0: N | P1 desc/size: N | >200 lines: N | Avg score: X/14 Actions: P0: N, P1: N, P2: N, P3: N | No files modified.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Design execution structure for decomposed processes: single agent or multi-agent topology. Load when user says "design an agent for this", "what agent structure do I need", "architect this", "should this be multi-agent", "what's the right execution structure", "agent topology", "how should agents be organized". Takes process-decomposer output as primary input. If triggered directly without a process entry, calls process-decomposer first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Internal skill. Called by setup-evaluation after a PASS. Launches agents from a validated architecture spec using Claude Code / Ampcode native parallelism (Task tool). Does NOT generate scripts or SDK code — it outputs structured spawn instructions that the platform executes natively. Never invoked directly by the user. Never launches without a setup-evaluation PASS.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Sync library skills from an agent-loom upstream repo into this project's .agents/skills while preserving project-local and forked skills. Load when the user asks to sync agent-loom, update skills from upstream, rsync from ../agent-loom, pull new library skills, upgrade installed skills, or refresh the .agents folder without losing custom project skills. Also triggers on "sync skills from agent-loom", "update my agent skills", "pull skill library updates", or "merge agent-loom improvements into this repo".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Instrument a shipped product's AI agents with tracing and observability so you can see what they did, why outputs happened, and what each run cost. Plain-language primer plus free-tier-first backend selection (Langfuse, Phoenix, LangSmith, Braintrust) and OpenTelemetry/OpenInference instrumentation. Load when the user asks to add observability, add tracing, instrument my agents, see what my agent is doing in production, set up Langfuse or Phoenix or LangSmith, debug why my agent gave a bad answer, or track LLM cost per request. Also fires when agent-system-architecture or setup-evaluation requires an observability plan for an agent-chain product. NOT for tracing the coding agent itself — that is run-trace. Precondition for runtime-learning-loop.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

dvy1987 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する