AB design-thinking
Use this skill when the user asks for design thinking (including naming it or directing use/apply/run with obvious misspellings; decisive) or wants human-centered exploration—empathizing with needs, framing the problem, ideating, prototyping intent, and defining what to learn next. Use for HCD, service or UX concept sprints, how-might-we style discovery before build, or reframing from user evidence, even with messy context. Skip when the spec is fully frozen and they want no discovery, or when the task is code-only maintenance with no user problem framing requested.
decisive) or wants human-centered exploration—empathizing with needs, framing the problem, ideating, prototyping intent, and defining what to learn next.
As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — 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: 2. 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 65/100
- 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
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 11 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 672 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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
- +4No input/output examples
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 572: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 11 items
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 76.