mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-10-16 01:37:05 +00:00
Release 1.1.2 — the default path works end to end
Fix release for 1.1.1: the minimal path end to end, engine commands that run on Godot, Unity and Unreal, hook warnings you can see, and verdicts that say when they could not check. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.1 → v1.1.2). Fixes #67 Fixes #131 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuJn2FdynEybfL5KC697nJ
This commit is contained in:
Donchitos
co-authored by
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
parent
7ed2c3e9c4
commit
b21fa0f7f2
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: skill-test
|
||||
description: "Validate skill files for structural compliance and behavioral correctness. Four modes: static linter, spec, category rubric, audit."
|
||||
argument-hint: "static [skill-name | all] | spec [skill-name] | category [skill-name | all] | audit"
|
||||
argument-hint: "static [skill-name | all] | spec [skill-or-agent-name] | category [skill-or-agent-name | all] | audit"
|
||||
user-invocable: true
|
||||
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Bash(bash "*/.claude/skills/skill-test/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config *)
|
||||
model: sonnet
|
||||
@@ -17,17 +17,17 @@ every file write follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`
|
||||
|
||||
# Skill Test
|
||||
|
||||
Validates `.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md` files for structural compliance and
|
||||
behavioral correctness. No external dependencies — runs entirely within the
|
||||
existing skill/hook/template architecture.
|
||||
Validates skills (`.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md`) and agents (`.claude/agents/*.md`)
|
||||
for structural compliance and behavioral correctness. No external dependencies —
|
||||
runs entirely within the existing skill/hook/template architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
**Four modes:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Mode | Command | Purpose | Token Cost |
|
||||
|------|---------|---------|------------|
|
||||
| `static` | `/skill-test static [name\|all]` | Structural linter — 7 compliance checks per skill | Low (~1k/skill) |
|
||||
| `spec` | `/skill-test spec [name]` | Behavioral verifier — evaluates assertions in test spec | Medium (~5k/skill) |
|
||||
| `category` | `/skill-test category [name\|all]` | Category rubric — checks skill against its category-specific metrics | Low (~2k/skill) |
|
||||
| `static` | `/skill-test static [name\|all]` | Structural linter — 7 compliance checks per skill (skills only) | Low (~1k/skill) |
|
||||
| `spec` | `/skill-test spec [name]` | Behavioral verifier — evaluates assertions in a skill's or agent's test spec | Medium (~5k each) |
|
||||
| `category` | `/skill-test category [name\|all]` | Category rubric — checks a skill or agent against its category-specific metrics | Low (~2k each) |
|
||||
| `audit` | `/skill-test audit` | Coverage report — skills, agent specs, last test dates | Low (~3k total) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -38,12 +38,25 @@ Determine mode from the first argument:
|
||||
|
||||
- `static [name]` → run 7 structural checks on one skill
|
||||
- `static all` → run 7 structural checks on all skills (Glob `.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md`)
|
||||
- `spec [name]` → read skill + test spec, evaluate assertions
|
||||
- `spec [name]` → read the skill or agent + its test spec, evaluate assertions
|
||||
- `category [name]` → run category-specific rubric from `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/quality-rubric.md`
|
||||
- `category all` → run category rubric for every skill that has a `category:` in catalog
|
||||
- `category all` → run category rubric for every skill and every agent that has a `category:` in catalog
|
||||
- `audit` (or no argument) → read catalog, list all skills and agents, show coverage
|
||||
|
||||
If argument is missing or unrecognized, output usage and stop.
|
||||
If the argument is unrecognized, output usage and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolve the name before `spec` or `category`.** Look it up in
|
||||
`CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`: an entry under `skills:` is a skill
|
||||
(`.claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md`); an entry under `agents:` is an agent
|
||||
(`.claude/agents/[name].md`). With no catalog entry, use whichever of those two
|
||||
files exists. Only when neither exists, report "'[name]' is neither a skill in
|
||||
`.claude/skills/` nor an agent in `.claude/agents/`." and stop. A name that is
|
||||
also an ordinary word is still a name: `/skill-test spec help` tests the `/help`
|
||||
skill, never a request for this skill's usage.
|
||||
|
||||
`static` checks SKILL.md structure, so it is skills-only. Given an agent name,
|
||||
say so and point to `/skill-test spec [name]` — do not report the agent as
|
||||
missing.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -59,7 +72,9 @@ The file must contain all of these in the YAML frontmatter block:
|
||||
- `user-invocable:`
|
||||
- `allowed-tools:`
|
||||
|
||||
**FAIL** if any are absent.
|
||||
**FAIL** if any are absent. A file whose frontmatter does not parse fails Check 1
|
||||
too — malformed YAML is a structural defect this check exists to catch, not an
|
||||
unassessable file; see the per-skill result rule below.
|
||||
|
||||
### Check 2 — Multiple Phases
|
||||
The skill must have ≥2 numbered phase headings. Look for patterns like:
|
||||
@@ -88,11 +103,12 @@ or a value rather than a judgement. `/settings` is the reference case: it prints
|
||||
and writes configuration and has no verdict to give. Do not invent one to
|
||||
satisfy this check.
|
||||
|
||||
> The narrow earlier list (gate verdicts only, hard FAIL) failed 5 of 74 skills
|
||||
> for reasons that were not their fault — `/prototype` and `/vertical-slice`
|
||||
> advertise `PROCEED`/`PIVOT`/`KILL` in their own descriptions, `/adopt` and
|
||||
> `/security-audit` rank by severity, and `/settings` has no verdict by design.
|
||||
> A linter that cries wolf on 7% of the corpus stops being read.
|
||||
> A narrower list — gate verdicts only, hard FAIL on anything else — would wrongly
|
||||
> fail skills for reasons that are not their fault: `/prototype` and
|
||||
> `/vertical-slice` advertise `PROCEED`/`PIVOT`/`KILL` in their own descriptions,
|
||||
> `/adopt` and `/security-audit` rank by severity, and `/settings` has no verdict
|
||||
> by design. A linter that produces false failures on legitimate patterns stops
|
||||
> being trusted.
|
||||
|
||||
### Check 4 — Collaborative Protocol Language
|
||||
The skill must contain ask-before-write language. Look for:
|
||||
@@ -145,6 +161,14 @@ Verdict: WARNINGS (1 warning, 0 failures)
|
||||
Recommended: Add a "Follow-Up Actions" section at the end of the skill.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A WARN or FAIL line names its cause in parentheses, and any verdict other than
|
||||
COMPLIANT ends with a `Recommended:` line naming the fix.
|
||||
|
||||
The single-skill `Verdict:` is one of four values, the same as the `static all`
|
||||
Result column: **COMPLIANT** (no warnings, no failures), **WARNINGS** (warnings,
|
||||
no failures), **NON-COMPLIANT** (any FAIL), or **NOT ASSESSED** (the file could
|
||||
not be read or parsed, or its checks could not run — name the reason).
|
||||
|
||||
For `static all`, produce a summary table then list any non-compliant skills:
|
||||
```
|
||||
=== Skill Static Check: All 74 Skills ===
|
||||
@@ -161,43 +185,96 @@ Aggregate Verdict: N WARNINGS / N FAILURES / N NOT ASSESSED
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**`NOT ASSESSED` is a per-skill result here, not only an aggregate line.** A skill
|
||||
whose file could not be read or parsed, or whose checks could not run, is reported
|
||||
as `NOT ASSESSED` with the reason — never omitted from the table and never counted
|
||||
as COMPLIANT. Ranked **above COMPLIANT**, **below WARNINGS and NON-COMPLIANT**.
|
||||
whose file is missing or otherwise unreadable (permissions, not found), so no
|
||||
check could even start, is reported as `NOT ASSESSED` with the reason — never
|
||||
omitted from the table and never counted as COMPLIANT. Ranked **above
|
||||
COMPLIANT**, **below WARNINGS and NON-COMPLIANT**. A file that *was* read but
|
||||
whose frontmatter does not parse is a different case: Check 1 fails on it (see
|
||||
above), so it is reported **NON-COMPLIANT**, not NOT ASSESSED — the defect is in
|
||||
the skill, not in the linter's access to it.
|
||||
|
||||
**And state the denominator.** `All 74 Skills` in the header must be the number
|
||||
actually examined, not the number that exist: report `[N] of [M] skills checked`
|
||||
whenever they differ. A summary whose counts silently sum to less than its own
|
||||
title is the failure this skill is supposed to catch in others.
|
||||
|
||||
No file writes in static mode.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2B: Spec Mode — Behavioral Verifier
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1 — Locate Files
|
||||
|
||||
Find skill at `.claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md`.
|
||||
Use the skill or agent file resolved in Phase 1.
|
||||
Look up the spec path from `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` — use the
|
||||
`spec:` field for the matching skill entry.
|
||||
`spec:` field on the matching `skills:` or `agents:` entry.
|
||||
|
||||
If either is missing:
|
||||
- Missing skill: "Skill '[name]' not found in `.claude/skills/`."
|
||||
- Missing skill or agent: the Phase 1 message.
|
||||
- Missing spec path in catalog: "No spec path set for '[name]' in catalog.yaml."
|
||||
- Spec file not found at path: "Spec file missing at [path]. Run `/skill-test audit`
|
||||
to see coverage gaps."
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2 — Read Both Files
|
||||
|
||||
Read the skill file and test spec file completely.
|
||||
Read the skill or agent file and the test spec file completely.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3 — Evaluate Assertions
|
||||
|
||||
**Evaluate against what the model running it can see.** A skill runs in a
|
||||
session, and a spawned agent in its own context, and both have the project's
|
||||
`CLAUDE.md` loaded along with every file it imports on an `@path` line (a
|
||||
spawned agent quotes `coordination-rules.md` word for word without reading it).
|
||||
Read those files too. A rule stated there counts for every skill and agent —
|
||||
cite the file it came from. Where the skill's or agent's own file contradicts
|
||||
it, the own file wins: it is the more specific instruction.
|
||||
|
||||
**For an agent**, the spec's sections are evaluated against the agent file —
|
||||
and against every skill its frontmatter lists under `skills:`, which Claude
|
||||
Code loads into the agent at launch:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Static Assertions** — check each against the agent's frontmatter and body.
|
||||
An assertion that names a literal value (a `model:` alias, a frontmatter key,
|
||||
a tool name) is an exact comparison with the file: `model: inherit` does not
|
||||
satisfy "Model tier is `sonnet`", and a near match is FAIL, never PARTIAL.
|
||||
- **Test Cases** — evaluate each case's expected behavior against the agent's
|
||||
written instructions, the same way a skill's are evaluated below. A case
|
||||
that names a gate ID (`LP-FEASIBILITY`, `CD-PILLARS`, …) is that gate's
|
||||
invocation: the spawning skill has the agent read
|
||||
`.claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md` first, so that file's Prompt and
|
||||
Verdicts are the agent's instructions for the case — read it too.
|
||||
- **Redirect and escalation cases** — the agent is asked for work another role
|
||||
owns, or meets a conflict it cannot settle. The case is met when the loaded
|
||||
`coordination-rules.md` covers the step — rule 2 (no binding decisions
|
||||
outside its domain), rule 3 (escalate a conflict to the shared parent) or
|
||||
rule 5 (no files outside its directories without delegation) — **and** the
|
||||
agent's own file names the owning role in its collaborator, delegation,
|
||||
escalation or "must not" lists. Cite both; do not require the agent to
|
||||
restate the redirect in its own words. It is a FAIL when the agent's file
|
||||
claims that work for itself, or when no loaded file names who owns it.
|
||||
- **Protocol Compliance** — use the spec's own `## Protocol Compliance` list in
|
||||
place of the four skill checks below.
|
||||
|
||||
**For a skill**, check each of the spec's **Static Assertions** against the
|
||||
`SKILL.md` frontmatter and body the same way; a literal value is an exact
|
||||
comparison. `/skill-test static` runs only its 7 fixed checks, so a spec's own
|
||||
static lines — a verdict keyword, a phase, "May I write" before a named file —
|
||||
are evaluated here or nowhere.
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this step applies to skills and agents alike.
|
||||
|
||||
For each **Test Case** in the spec:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read the **Fixture** description (assumed state of project files)
|
||||
2. Read the **Expected behavior** steps
|
||||
3. Read each **Assertion** checkbox
|
||||
|
||||
A case with no **Fixture** reads its **Input** as the fixture; a case with no
|
||||
**Assertions** list treats each **Expected behavior** bullet as an assertion —
|
||||
most agent specs are written this way, and a case verdict is not left undefined
|
||||
just because it has no separate checklist.
|
||||
|
||||
For each assertion, evaluate whether the skill's written instructions, if
|
||||
followed correctly given the fixture state, would satisfy it. This is a
|
||||
Claude-evaluated reasoning check, not code execution.
|
||||
@@ -208,14 +285,20 @@ Mark each assertion:
|
||||
- **FAIL** — skill instructions would NOT satisfy this assertion given the fixture
|
||||
- **NOT ASSESSED** — the assertion could not be evaluated at all: it names a
|
||||
fixture state the spec never defines, depends on runtime behavior no static
|
||||
read can settle, or references a file or section that does not exist. Rank it
|
||||
read can settle, or references a file or section that does not exist (a file
|
||||
that is merely silent on the behaviour is FAIL or PARTIAL, not this). Rank it
|
||||
**above PASS** (an assertion nobody could evaluate has not been satisfied) and
|
||||
**below PARTIAL and FAIL** (an ambiguity somebody identified is more actionable
|
||||
than one nobody could reach). Do not resolve an unevaluable assertion to PASS
|
||||
because the skill "probably" handles it — that judgement is what the spec exists
|
||||
to replace.
|
||||
|
||||
For **Protocol Compliance** assertions (always present):
|
||||
For a skill's **Protocol Compliance** section (always present), evaluate each line
|
||||
of the spec's own list against the `SKILL.md` exactly as you evaluate a case
|
||||
assertion — PASS, PARTIAL, FAIL or NOT ASSESSED. Specs put rules there that no
|
||||
case repeats ("covered by the protocol compliance assertions above"), so a
|
||||
list that is not evaluated is a set of rules nobody checks. These four checks are
|
||||
the floor, added when the list does not already cover them:
|
||||
- Check whether the skill requires "May I write" before file writes
|
||||
- Check whether the skill presents findings before requesting approval
|
||||
- Check whether the skill ends with a recommended next step
|
||||
@@ -228,6 +311,11 @@ For **Protocol Compliance** assertions (always present):
|
||||
Date: [date]
|
||||
Spec: CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/[category]/[name].md
|
||||
|
||||
Static Assertions:
|
||||
[PASS] [assertion text]
|
||||
[NOT ASSESSED] [assertion text]
|
||||
Reason: [why it could not be evaluated]
|
||||
|
||||
Case 1: [Happy Path — name]
|
||||
Fixture: [summary]
|
||||
Assertions:
|
||||
@@ -243,11 +331,21 @@ Case 2: [Edge Case — name]
|
||||
Protocol Compliance:
|
||||
[PASS] Uses "May I write" before file writes
|
||||
[PASS] Presents findings before asking approval
|
||||
[WARN] No explicit next-step handoff at end
|
||||
[PARTIAL] No explicit next-step handoff at end
|
||||
|
||||
Overall Verdict: FAIL (1 case failed, 1 warning)
|
||||
Overall Verdict: FAIL (1 case failed, 1 protocol line partial)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A Case Verdict is the worst result among its assertions, and the Overall
|
||||
Verdict the worst across the static assertions, the cases and Protocol
|
||||
Compliance, in this order:
|
||||
FAIL, PARTIAL, NOT ASSESSED, PASS. An assertion nobody could evaluate keeps the
|
||||
overall result from reading PASS.
|
||||
|
||||
For an agent, the header is `=== Agent Spec Test: [name] ===`, `Spec:` is its
|
||||
path under `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/agents/`, and a `Static Assertions:`
|
||||
block comes before Case 1.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5 — Offer to Write Results
|
||||
|
||||
"May I write these results to `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/results/skill-test-spec-[name]-[date].md`
|
||||
@@ -255,9 +353,9 @@ and update `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`?"
|
||||
|
||||
If yes:
|
||||
- Write results file to `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/results/`
|
||||
- Update the skill's entry in `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`:
|
||||
- Update the skill's or agent's entry in `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`:
|
||||
- `last_spec: [date]`
|
||||
- `last_spec_result: PASS|PARTIAL|FAIL`
|
||||
- `last_spec_result: PASS|PARTIAL|FAIL|NOT ASSESSED` — the Overall Verdict
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -265,51 +363,72 @@ If yes:
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1 — Locate Skill and Category
|
||||
|
||||
Find skill at `.claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md`.
|
||||
Look up `category:` field in `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`.
|
||||
Use the skill or agent file resolved in Phase 1.
|
||||
Look up the `category:` field on its `skills:` or `agents:` entry in
|
||||
`CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
If skill not found: "Skill '[name]' not found."
|
||||
If neither file exists: the Phase 1 message.
|
||||
If no `category:` field: "No category assigned for '[name]' in catalog.yaml.
|
||||
Add `category: [name]` to the skill entry first."
|
||||
Add `category: [name]` to its entry first."
|
||||
|
||||
For `category all`: collect all skills with a `category:` field and process each.
|
||||
For `category all`: collect every skill and every agent with a `category:` field
|
||||
and process each, reporting skills and agents in separate tables.
|
||||
`category: utility` skills are evaluated against U1 (static checks pass) and U2
|
||||
(gate mode correct if applicable) only — skip to the static mode for U1.
|
||||
Cross-check against `.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md` and `.claude/agents/*.md`
|
||||
(Audit mode's Step 2 glob): list any skill or agent missing from the catalog, or
|
||||
catalogued with no `category:`, by name as **NOT ASSESSED** — never silently
|
||||
excluded from the run.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2 — Read Rubric Section
|
||||
|
||||
Read `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/quality-rubric.md`.
|
||||
Extract the section matching the skill's category (e.g., `### gate`, `### team`).
|
||||
Extract the section matching the category (e.g., `### gate`, `### team`; an
|
||||
agent's category is under `## Agent Categories`, e.g. `### director`).
|
||||
If the rubric has no section for the category, the result is **NOT ASSESSED**:
|
||||
name the missing section, and never borrow another category's metrics.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3 — Read Skill
|
||||
|
||||
Read the skill's `SKILL.md` fully.
|
||||
Read the skill's `SKILL.md` or the agent's `.claude/agents/[name].md` fully,
|
||||
and the project context Phase 2B Step 3 describes — a metric met by a rule in
|
||||
`CLAUDE.md` or a file it imports is met, citing that file. Its rule for
|
||||
redirect and escalation cases decides the domain, deferral and escalation
|
||||
metrics too (D2, D3, L2, S1–S3, O2).
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4 — Evaluate Rubric Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
For each metric in the category's rubric table:
|
||||
1. Check whether the skill's written instructions clearly satisfy the criterion
|
||||
2. Mark PASS, FAIL, or WARN
|
||||
3. For FAIL/WARN, identify the exact gap in the skill text (quote the relevant section
|
||||
or note its absence)
|
||||
1. Check whether the skill's or agent's written instructions clearly satisfy the criterion
|
||||
2. Mark PASS, FAIL, WARN, or NOT ASSESSED (the metric could not be evaluated — name why)
|
||||
3. For FAIL/WARN/NOT ASSESSED, identify the exact gap in the text (quote the
|
||||
relevant section, note its absence, or name what could not be evaluated)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5 — Output Report
|
||||
|
||||
For an agent, the header is `=== Agent Category Check: [name] ([category]) ===`.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
=== Skill Category Check: /[name] ([category]) ===
|
||||
|
||||
Metric G1 — Review mode read: PASS
|
||||
Metric G2 — Full mode directors: FAIL
|
||||
Gap: Phase 3 spawns only CD-PHASE-GATE; TD-PHASE-GATE, PR-PHASE-GATE, AD-PHASE-GATE absent
|
||||
Metric G2 — Director panel width: FAIL
|
||||
Gap: Phase 3 spawns only CD-PHASE-GATE at `workflow: full`; TD-PHASE-GATE, PR-PHASE-GATE, AD-PHASE-GATE absent
|
||||
Metric G3 — Lean mode: PHASE-GATE only: PASS
|
||||
Metric G4 — Solo mode: no directors: PASS
|
||||
Metric G5 — No auto-advance: PASS
|
||||
|
||||
Verdict: FAIL (1 failure, 0 warnings)
|
||||
Fix: Add TD-PHASE-GATE, PR-PHASE-GATE, and AD-PHASE-GATE to the full-mode director
|
||||
panel in Phase 3.
|
||||
Fix: Size the Phase 3 panel from `modes.workflow` — PR at `minimal`, TD + PR at
|
||||
`standard`, all four at `full` — and name any perspective a narrower panel leaves out.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The category verdict, first match wins: **FAIL** when any metric fails; else
|
||||
**WARNINGS** when any metric warns; else **NOT ASSESSED** when any metric could
|
||||
not be evaluated (a rubric section missing, a file unreadable); else **PASS**
|
||||
when every metric passes — the same ranking as static and spec mode. It is
|
||||
`last_category_result` in the catalog.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6 — Offer to Update Catalog
|
||||
|
||||
"May I update `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` to record this category check
|
||||
@@ -329,8 +448,11 @@ yet (first-run state).
|
||||
Glob `.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md` to get the complete list of skills.
|
||||
Extract skill name from each path (directory name).
|
||||
|
||||
Also read the `agents:` section from `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` to get the
|
||||
complete list of agents.
|
||||
Glob `.claude/agents/*.md` for the complete list of agents — the repo itself,
|
||||
not the catalog, is the covered set (`.claude/rules/skill-authoring.md` §5:
|
||||
gates derive their covered set, they do not enumerate it). Compare both globs
|
||||
against the catalog's `skills:`/`agents:` entries and report any skill or agent
|
||||
missing from the catalog by name, so an uncatalogued one cannot drop out silently.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3 — Build Skill Coverage Table
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -345,7 +467,8 @@ For each skill:
|
||||
|
||||
For each agent in catalog's `agents:` section:
|
||||
- Check if a spec file exists (use the `spec:` path from catalog, or glob `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/agents/*/[name].md`)
|
||||
- Look up `last_spec`, `last_spec_result`, `category` from catalog
|
||||
- Look up `last_spec`, `last_spec_result`, `last_category`,
|
||||
`last_category_result`, `category` from catalog
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4 — Output Report
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -354,7 +477,7 @@ For each agent in catalog's `agents:` section:
|
||||
Date: [date]
|
||||
|
||||
SKILLS (74 total)
|
||||
Specs written: 72 (97%) | Never static tested: 74 | Never category tested: 74
|
||||
Specs written: 73 (99%) | Never static tested: 74 | Never category tested: 74
|
||||
|
||||
Skill | Cat | Has Spec | Last Static | S.Result | Last Cat | C.Result | Priority
|
||||
-----------------------|----------|----------|-------------|----------|----------|----------|----------
|
||||
@@ -365,16 +488,16 @@ design-review | review | YES | never | — | never
|
||||
AGENTS (49 total)
|
||||
Agent specs written: 49 (100%)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent | Category | Has Spec | Last Spec | Result
|
||||
-----------------------|------------|----------|-------------|--------
|
||||
creative-director | director | YES | never | —
|
||||
technical-director | director | YES | never | —
|
||||
Agent | Category | Has Spec | Last Spec | Result | Last Cat | C.Result
|
||||
-----------------------|------------|----------|-------------|--------|----------|----------
|
||||
creative-director | director | YES | never | — | never | —
|
||||
technical-director | director | YES | never | — | never | —
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
Top 5 Priority Gaps (skills with no spec, critical/high priority):
|
||||
(none if all specs are written)
|
||||
|
||||
Skill coverage: 72/72 specs (100%)
|
||||
Skill coverage: 73/74 specs (99%)
|
||||
Agent coverage: 49/49 specs (100%)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -397,6 +520,7 @@ After any mode completes, offer contextual follow-up:
|
||||
- After `spec [name]` PASS: "Update `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` to record this
|
||||
pass date. Consider running `/skill-test audit` to find the next spec gap."
|
||||
- After `spec [name]` FAIL: "Review the failing assertions and update the skill
|
||||
or the test spec to resolve the mismatch."
|
||||
or agent, or the test spec, to resolve the mismatch."
|
||||
- After `audit`: "Start with the critical-priority gaps. Use the spec template
|
||||
at `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/templates/skill-test-spec.md` to create new specs."
|
||||
at `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/templates/skill-test-spec.md` (agents:
|
||||
`agent-test-spec.md`) to create new specs."
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user