SKILLEMALL.ai

AC react18-string-refs

Provides exact migration patterns for React string refs (ref="name" + this.refs.name) to React.createRef() in class components. Use this skill whenever migrating string ref usage - including single element refs, multiple refs in a component, refs in lists, callback refs, and refs passed to child components. Always use this skill before writing any ref migration code - the multiple-refs-in-list pattern is particularly tricky and this skill prevents the most common mistakes. Use it for React 18.3.1 migration (string refs warn) and React 19 migration (string refs removed).

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github MIT 2 files body ≈ 370 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com analyzed 13 h ago

Provides exact migration patterns for React string refs (ref="name" + this.refs.name) to React.createRef() in class components. Use this skill whenever…

As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

GeneratorSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
88
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
53/100
Has gaps
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

The same skill appears in 1 more place: RA-Skills

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: 2. 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    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 4): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100

    • 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
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 75Steps. 3 steps
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 370 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
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 576: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 4 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 3 items
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

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