skill-test
Skill4 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub
Validates Web Studio skills and agents: `static` (structural linter), `spec` (behavioural spec evaluation), `category` (rubric metrics), `agent` (agent spec evaluation), `audit` (coverage report), using the testing framework (catalog.yaml, rubric, specs) from the kit or a project copy. Run after editing a skill or agent, for 'lint the skills', 'test skill X', 'coverage of the kit'.
14 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiostheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 19, 2026
- venus2099/codex-game-studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- andrewcamerongraham/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 5, 2026
- SebastianLuser/claude-code-arcanetheir own version, first seen Sep 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use soak-test, team-live-ops and 7 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
lilangMaxSkillsoak-test
Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.
Also in 9 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillteam-live-ops
Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.
Also in 9 projects that use this
- +7 more from lilangMax
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 14
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- databricks-solutions/ai-dev-kit★ 2ksame name
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 118same name
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- fagemx/edda★ 36same name
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 17same name
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 8same name
- hongyuanc/codex-game-studios★ 5same name
- SebastianLuser/claude-code-arcane★ 2same name
- dawn840705/claude-code-studios★ 1same name
4 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository52 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- testing/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- a11y-auditSkill
- adoptSkill
- api-contractSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- backlogSkill
- brainstormSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- collaboration-protocolSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- data-modelSkill
- dependency-auditSkill
- deploySkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- docsSkill
- feature-specSkill
- game-conceptSkill
- hardenSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- impactSkill
- incidentSkill
- initSkill
- migrateSkill
- pentestSkill
- perf-auditSkill
- product-specSkill
- qa-planSkill
- refactorSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- security-auditSkill
- setup-stackSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- stack-updateSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- team-featureSkill
- team-gameSkill
- team-releaseSkill
- team-securitySkill
- tech-debtSkill
- test-setupSkill
- threat-modelSkill
- updateSkill
- ux-specSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 35
Read the framework's catalog.yaml (categories, spec paths, dates).
- Very specific: line 51
Read SKILL.md and the spec at the catalog's spec: path (skills/<category>/<name>.md inside the framework).
- Very specific: line 55
After the "write" answer: touch .claude/.write-consent (rule 7), then write.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Skill Test
Reply in the project conversation language (CLAUDE.md → Language); code, identifiers, paths and commit messages stay in English.
Tests the studio's own skills and agents (not the project).
- Framework directory — the first of these that contains
catalog.yaml:./testing(kit repository),./web-studio-testing(project copy), the plugin root'stesting/(from the session-start "Plugin root:" line orclaude plugin list --json). Spec paths come from the catalog'sspec:field, never guessed; outside the kit repository thetesting/prefix of that path stands for the framework directory. - Sources — skills:
./skills/*/SKILL.md(kit repo),.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md(copy mode) or the plugin root'sskills/; agents likewise (agents/*.md,.claude/agents/*.md). - Catalog gates are recorded (rule 7): before each "May I update
catalog.yaml…?" / "May I write the result…?" question below,<hooks>session-state.sh set Gate "/skill-test Phase 2X: update catalog?"(./hooks/in the kit repository; otherwise<hooks>is.claude/hooks/in copy mode and${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/in plugin mode), cleared after the answer with<hooks>session-state.sh set Gate "—"— one sentence per gate, so a session that resumes with the question open continues here.
| Mode | What | Cost |
static [name|all] | 9 structural checks of SKILL.md | low |
spec [name] | evaluate a skill against its behavioural spec | medium |
category [name|all] | category rubric metrics | low |
agent [name|all] | agent static checks + agent spec evaluation | medium |
audit | coverage: who has a spec, last tested, result | low |
Phase 1: Arguments
- Parse mode and target; unknown mode → print the usage (the table above) and stop.
- Find the framework directory. None found and the mode is not
static→ say that onlystaticworks without a framework, name the directory it looks for, and stop without writing anything. - Read the framework's
catalog.yaml(categories, spec paths, dates).staticwithout a framework skips this step.
Phase 2A: static — 9 SKILL.md checks
- Frontmatter starts on line 1 with
---; fieldsname,description,argument-hint,user-invocable,allowed-tools— FAIL if missing. - ≥ 2 phases (
## Phase Nor ≥ 2##) — FAIL. - A verdict word (
PASS|FAIL|CONCERNS|APPROVED|ACCEPTED|PROPOSED|NEEDS REVISION|NEEDS CHANGES|BLOCKED|COMPLETE|READY|DONE|UPDATED|CLEAN|RELEASED|DEPLOYED|HARDENED|PLAYABLE|COMPLIANT|INITIALISED|RESOLVED|MITIGATED|WITHIN BUDGET|OVER BUDGET|ON TRACK|AT RISK|OFF TRACK|FIXED|IMPROVED|PLANNED) — FAIL. - Ask-before-write:
May I write(or an explicit gate sentence) whenWrite|Editis inallowed-tools— FAIL; otherwise WARN. A gate that is not anAskUserQuestionwith alternatives (coordination-rules, rule 7) — WARN. The gate must be followed bytouch .claude/.write-consent(the consent-guard hook reads that marker; a skill that writes without touching it warns on every write) — a write gate with no consent touch after it — WARN. - A "Next step" at the end — WARN; one that is not offered as an
AskUserQuestionwith alternatives — WARN. - A reference/template/rules link (
stack-reference/,templates/,rules/) for authoring/analysis skills — WARN. argument-hintnon-empty and consistent with the argument-parsing phase — WARN.- Language: body in English, no project-specific or personal references (hostnames, names, private repo names) — WARN.
- A "Reply in the project conversation language" line, or a pointer to
coordination-rules.md§ Skill conventions (which defines it once) — the skill honours CLAUDE.md → Language regardless of its own English text — WARN. Output: a table of checks,COMPLIANT | WARNINGS | NON-COMPLIANT; forall— a summary table. Catalog record (only with a framework —staticwithout one has no catalog and writes nothing): the catalog carrieslast_static/last_static_resultper skill for exactly this run. After the table, record the gate (<hooks>session-state.sh set Gate "/skill-test Phase 2A: update catalog?"), then "May I updatecatalog.yaml(last_static= today,last_static_result= the verdict, for N skill(s))?" as oneAskUserQuestion: update the catalog (Recommended) · do not write; clear the gate after the answer. After the "update" answer:touch .claude/.write-consent(rule 7), then edit only those two fields of the tested rows; nothing else in the catalog changes.auditreads the fields back.
Phase 2B: spec — behavioural evaluation
- Read SKILL.md and the spec at the catalog's
spec:path (skills/<category>/<name>.mdinside the framework). - For every case and assertion, find the instructions in the skill text that satisfy it: PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL with a quoted line.
- Totals per case and protocol.
- Record the gate (
<hooks>session-state.sh set Gate "/skill-test Phase 2B: write results and catalog?"), then "May I write the result toresults/<name>-<date>.mdand updatecatalog.yaml?" as oneAskUserQuestion: results and catalog (Recommended) · results only · do not write; clear the gate after the answer. - After the "write" answer:
touch .claude/.write-consent(rule 7), then write.
Phase 2C: category — rubric
The category section of quality-rubric.md → each metric PASS/WARN/FAIL with justification; the category's verdict is COMPLIANT | WARNINGS | NON-COMPLIANT from the worst metric.
Catalog record, as in 2A: record the gate (<hooks>session-state.sh set Gate "/skill-test Phase 2C: update catalog?"), then "May I update catalog.yaml (last_category = today, last_category_result = the verdict, for the N skill(s) of the category)?" — one AskUserQuestion: update the catalog (Recommended) · do not write; clear the gate after the answer. After the "update" answer: touch .claude/.write-consent (rule 7), then edit only those two fields.
Phase 2D: agent
Static: the agent file exists, name/description/model/tools, the collaboration protocol block, a stack-reference link, domain and "never"/escalation described. Then evaluate against the agent's spec at the catalog's spec: path (agents/<tier>/<name>.md, 5 cases) as in 2B, including its write gate. all runs every catalogued agent and ends with a summary table; an agent without a spec is listed as such, never skipped silently.
Phase 2E: audit
A table of all skills/agents: category/tier, spec present?, last_static/spec/category (date, result), priority. Uncatalogued files listed separately.
Verdict: COMPLIANT | WARNINGS | NON-COMPLIANT. Next step — one AskUserQuestion: /skill-improve <name> for failures (Recommended) · /skill-test spec <name> next · stop here.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

