AC email-compat
Write and verify HTML email that renders correctly across email clients. Use whenever building, editing, or reviewing an HTML email, an email template, or a transactional message, and whenever a question involves Outlook, Gmail, Apple Mail, or "will this render in email". Covers what CSS and HTML each client supports, backed by caniemail.com data. Provides the layout rules that keep an email compatible in the first place, then lints the finished markup and reports only what breaks, per client, with workarounds. Not for sending mail, deliverability, SPF/DKIM/DMARC, or ESP choice.
Write and verify HTML email that renders correctly across email clients.
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, progress reporting
How to improve
- 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: 9. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 25 steps
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1843 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -36 of 7 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 585: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 25 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.