Skill: aidenchangzy/skill-quality-auditor-new (version 1.0.0)

--- name: skill-quality-auditor description: Audit another Codex skill for structural compliance, trigger quality, instruction clarity, reuse of scripts or references, and overall maintainability. Use when Codex is given a skill folder and needs to judge whether the skill is qualified, explain why it passes or fails, and summarize strengths, weaknesses, blockers, and improvement ideas across multiple dimensions. --- # Skill Quality Auditor ## Overview Evaluate a target skill with a consistent rubric and return a clear pass/fail-style verdict plus a multi-dimensional review. Prefer the bundled script for the first pass, then turn the raw findings into a concise human-readable assessment. ## Workflow 1. Identify the target skill folder. 2. Run `scripts/evaluate_skill.py <path-to-skill>`. 3. Read the report and group findings into: - final verdict - strengths - weaknesses - critical blockers - recommended fixes 4. If the script reports missing context or borderline results, inspect the target skill's `SKILL.md` and any referenced resources before writing the final judgment. 5. Keep the final answer decisive: say whether the skill is currently qualified, conditionally qualified, or not qualified. ## Rubric Score the skill across these dimensions: - `structure`: required files, frontmatter validity, naming, obvious TODO placeholders - `triggering`: whether `description` clearly explains what the skill does and when to use it - `workflow`: whether the body gives actionable steps instead of vague guidance - `progressive_disclosure`: whether detailed material is kept in scripts or references instead of bloating `SKILL.md` - `resources`: whether scripts, references, and assets are included only when useful and are mentioned in the body - `examples_and_outputs`: whether the skill helps the agent understand expected usage or output shape - `maintainability`: clarity, concision, stale metadata checks, and overall ease of iteration Use [references/rubric.md](./references/rubric.md) when you need the detailed scoring logic and interpretation rules. ## Verdict Rules Use these labels: - `Qualified`: no critical blockers and score is strong enough for immediate use - `Borderline`: usable but needs material fixes soon - `Not Qualified`: missing required structure or too weak to trust in repeated use Treat these as critical blockers: - missing `SKILL.md` - invalid or missing YAML frontmatter - missing `name` or `description` - unresolved template placeholders such as `TODO` - description too weak to trigger reliably - instructions too incomplete to execute the core task safely ## Output Shape Prefer this response shape: ### Verdict State `Qualified`, `Borderline`, or `Not Qualified` in the first sentence and explain the main reason. ### Score Summary Include the total score and 3-5 highest-signal dimension notes. ### What Works Well List concrete strengths tied to files or sections. ### What Needs Work List concrete weaknesses tied to files or sections. ### Next Fixes List the smallest set of changes most likely to move the skill to `Qualified`. ## Script Run: ```bash python3 scripts/evaluate_skill.py /absolute/path/to/skill ``` Optional JSON mode: ```bash python3 scripts/evaluate_skill.py /absolute/path/to/skill --json ``` The script is dependency-free and performs a deterministic first-pass audit. It is intentionally conservative: if a skill barely explains its trigger conditions or still contains template leftovers, the script should flag it instead of assuming good intent. ## Review Rules - Prefer evidence over taste. - Praise strengths explicitly; do not only list problems. - Distinguish hard failures from improvement opportunities. - If the target skill intentionally omits scripts, references, or agents metadata, do not penalize that by itself. - Penalize unused or stale directories when they add confusion. - When inferring quality from wording, cite the exact section or file that led to the conclusion. ## Trigger Examples - "Check whether this skill is规范合格." - "Review this skill and tell me if it passes." - "Audit this skill folder and summarize the good and bad." - "Evaluate this skill against best practices and give me a verdict."


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: suspicious (MEDIUM)