Skip to content
Back to skills

Skill Test

ASecurity

Validate skill files for structural compliance and behavioral correctness. Three modes: static (linter), spec (behavioral), audit (coverage report).

  • 17 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 6, 2026
ai-agentsgotestinggit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 6, 2026

npx -y skills add IdoCohen560/claude-unity-game-studio --skill skill-test --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Skill Test?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Skill Test
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/idocohen560-skill-test-claude-unity-game-studio/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/idocohen560-skill-test-claude-unity-game-studio)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: skill-test
description: "Validate skill files for structural compliance and behavioral correctness. Three modes: static (linter), spec (behavioral), audit (coverage report)."
argument-hint: "static [skill-name | all] | spec [skill-name] | category [skill-name | all] | audit"
user-invocable: true
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write
---

# 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.

**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) |
| `audit` | `/skill-test audit` | Coverage report — skills, agent specs, last test dates | Low (~3k total) |

---

## Phase 1: Parse Arguments

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
- `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
- `audit` (or no argument) → read catalog, list all skills and agents, show coverage

If argument is missing or unrecognized, output usage and stop.

---

## Phase 2A: Static Mode — Structural Linter

For each skill being tested, read its `SKILL.md` fully and run all 7 checks:

### Check 1 — Required Frontmatter Fields
The file must contain all of these in the YAML frontmatter block:
- `name:`
- `description:`
- `argument-hint:`
- `user-invocable:`
- `allowed-tools:`

**FAIL** if any are absent.

### Check 2 — Multiple Phases
The skill must have ≥2 numbered phase headings. Look for patterns like:
- `## Phase N` or `## Phase N:`
- `## N.` (numbered top-level sections)
- At least 2 distinct `##` headings if phases aren't explicitly numbered

**FAIL** if fewer than 2 phase-like headings are found.

### Check 3 — Verdict Keywords
The skill must contain at least one of: `PASS`, `FAIL`, `CONCERNS`, `APPROVED`,
`BLOCKED`, `COMPLETE`, `READY`, `COMPLIANT`, `NON-COMPLIANT`

**FAIL** if none are present.

### Check 4 — Collaborative Protocol Language
The skill must contain ask-before-write language. Look for:
- `"May I write"` (canonical form)
- `"before writing"` or `"approval"` near file-write instructions
- `"ask"` + `"write"` in close proximity (within same section)

**WARN** if absent (some read-only skills legitimately skip this).
**FAIL** if `allowed-tools` includes `Write` or `Edit` but no ask-before-write language is found.

### Check 5 — Next-Step Handoff
The skill must end with a recommended next action or follow-up path. Look for:
- A final section mentioning another skill (e.g., `/story-done`, `/gate-check`)
- "Recommended next" or "next step" phrasing
- A "Follow-Up" or "After this" section

**WARN** if absent.

### Check 6 — Fork Context Complexity
If frontmatter contains `context: fork`, the skill should have ≥5 phase headings
(`##` level or numbered Phase N headers). Fork context is for complex multi-phase
skills; simple skills should not use it.

**WARN** if `context: fork` is set but fewer than 5 phases found.

### Check 7 — Argument Hint Plausibility
`argument-hint` must be non-empty. If the skill body mentions multiple modes
(e.g., "Mode A | Mode B"), the hint should reflect them. Cross-reference the
hint against the first phase's "Parse Arguments" section.

**WARN** if hint is `""` or if documented modes don't match hint.

---

### Static Mode Output Format

For a single skill:
```
=== Skill Static Check: /[name] ===

Check 1 — Frontmatter Fields:    PASS
Check 2 — Multiple Phases:       PASS (7 phases found)
Check 3 — Verdict Keywords:      PASS (PASS, FAIL, CONCERNS)
Check 4 — Collaborative Protocol: PASS ("May I write" found)
Check 5 — Next-Step Handoff:     WARN (no follow-up section found)
Check 6 — Fork Context Complexity: PASS (8 phases, context: fork set)
Check 7 — Argument Hint:         PASS

Verdict: WARNINGS (1 warning, 0 failures)
Recommended: Add a "Follow-Up Actions" section at the end of the skill.
```

For `static all`, produce a summary table then list any non-compliant skills:
```
=== Skill Static Check: All 52 Skills ===

Skill                  | Result       | Issues
-----------------------|--------------|-------
gate-check             | COMPLIANT    |
design-review          | COMPLIANT    |
story-readiness        | WARNINGS     | Check 5: no handoff
...

Summary: 48 COMPLIANT, 3 WARNINGS, 1 NON-COMPLIANT
Aggregate Verdict: N WARNINGS / N FAILURES
```

---

## Phase 2B: Spec Mode — Behavioral Verifier

### Step 1 — Locate Files

Find skill at `.claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md`.
Look up the spec path from `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` — use the
`spec:` field for the matching skill entry.

If either is missing:
- Missing skill: "Skill '[name]' not found in `.claude/skills/`."
- 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.

### Step 3 — Evaluate Assertions

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

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.

Mark each assertion:
- **PASS** — skill instructions clearly satisfy this assertion
- **PARTIAL** — skill instructions partially address it, but with ambiguity
- **FAIL** — skill instructions would NOT satisfy this assertion given the fixture

For **Protocol Compliance** assertions (always present):
- 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
- Check whether the skill avoids auto-creating files without approval

### Step 4 — Build Report

```
=== Skill Spec Test: /[name] ===
Date: [date]
Spec: CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/[category]/[name].md

Case 1: [Happy Path — name]
  Fixture: [summary]
  Assertions:
    [PASS] [assertion text]
    [FAIL] [assertion text]
       Reason: The skill's Phase 3 says "..." but the fixture state means "..."
  Case Verdict: FAIL

Case 2: [Edge Case — name]
  ...
  Case Verdict: PASS

Protocol Compliance:
  [PASS] Uses "May I write" before file writes
  [PASS] Presents findings before asking approval
  [WARN] No explicit next-step handoff at end

Overall Verdict: FAIL (1 case failed, 1 warning)
```

### Step 5 — Offer to Write Results

"May I write these results to `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/results/skill-test-spec-[name]-[date].md`
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`:
  - `last_spec: [date]`
  - `last_spec_result: PASS|PARTIAL|FAIL`

---

## Phase 2D: Category Mode — Rubric Evaluation

### 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`.

If skill not found: "Skill '[name]' not found."
If no `category:` field: "No category assigned for '[name]' in catalog.yaml.
Add `category: [name]` to the skill entry first."

For `category all`: collect all skills with a `category:` field and process each.
`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.

### 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`).

### Step 3 — Read Skill

Read the skill's `SKILL.md` fully.

### 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)

### Step 5 — Output Report

```
=== 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 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.
```

### Step 6 — Offer to Update Catalog

"May I update `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml` to record this category check
(`last_category`, `last_category_result`) for [name]?"

---

## Phase 2C: Audit Mode — Coverage Report

### Step 1 — Read Catalog

Read `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml`. If missing, note that catalog doesn't exist
yet (first-run state).

### Step 2 — Enumerate All Skills and Agents

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.

### Step 3 — Build Skill Coverage Table

For each skill:
- Check if a spec file exists (use the `spec:` path from catalog, or glob `CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/*/[name].md`)
- Look up `last_static`, `last_static_result`, `last_spec`, `last_spec_result`,
  `last_category`, `last_category_result`, `category` from catalog (or mark as
  "never" / "—" if not in catalog)
- Priority comes from catalog `priority:` field (critical/high/medium/low)

### Step 3b — Build Agent Coverage Table

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

### Step 4 — Output Report

```
=== Skill Test Coverage Audit ===
Date: [date]

SKILLS (72 total)
Specs written: 72 (100%) | Never static tested: 72 | Never category tested: 72

Skill                  | Cat      | Has Spec | Last Static | S.Result | Last Cat | C.Result | Priority
-----------------------|----------|----------|-------------|----------|----------|----------|----------
gate-check             | gate     | YES      | never       | —        | never    | —        | critical
design-review          | review   | YES      | never       | —        | never    | —        | critical
...

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       | —
...

Top 5 Priority Gaps (skills with no spec, critical/high priority):
(none if all specs are written)

Skill coverage:  72/72 specs (100%)
Agent coverage:  49/49 specs (100%)
```

No file writes in audit mode.

Offer: "Would you like to run `/skill-test static all` to check structural
compliance across all skills? `/skill-test category all` to run category rubric
checks? Or `/skill-test spec [name]` to run a specific behavioral test?"

---

## Phase 3: Recommended Next Steps

After any mode completes, offer contextual follow-up:

- After `static [name]`: "Run `/skill-test spec [name]` to validate behavioral
  correctness if a test spec exists."
- After `static all` with failures: "Address NON-COMPLIANT skills first. Run
  `/skill-test static [name]` individually for detailed remediation guidance."
- 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."
- 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."

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…