Skill Reviewer
SkillFiles & storage'Reviews SKILL.md files for structural quality across 8 dimensions (frontmatter, triggers, process, inputs, outputs,
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Skill Reviewer skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by matteotitta/genesys-skills in skills/meta/catalog/skill-reviewer/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Review a SKILL.md file for structural quality, completeness, and template compliance. Grades on 8 dimensions covering the canonical skill structure (see .claude/skills/_schema/SKILL.template.md + .claude/skills/_schema/AUTHORING.md). Used to catch drift before a skill ships.
This is a meta-skill — it reviews skill definitions, not skill outputs.
Claude Code Triggers
Invoke this skill when:
- "review skill [name]"
- "audit [skill-name] skill"
- "is [skill] well-defined?"
- "check skill quality for [skill]"
- "grade this SKILL.md"
Do NOT invoke when:
- User wants to review content output quality → use
/voice-reviewerinstead - User wants to check the skill catalog → use
/skill-cataloginstead - User wants to build a new skill from scratch → use prompt-design instead
Input Requirements
Required inputs
| Input | Description | Source |
|---|---|---|
| SKILL.md path | Path to the SKILL.md file to review | User provides or inferred from context |
Optional inputs (improve quality)
| Input | How it helps |
|---|---|
| SKILL.template.md | Reference template for comparison — at .claude/skills/_schema/SKILL.template.md |
| skill-catalog SKILL.md | Cross-reference for catalog alignment check |
Input validation checklist
Before proceeding, verify:
- SKILL.md file exists and is readable
- File contains YAML frontmatter (between
---delimiters)
If file doesn't exist: Tell the user the path is invalid and ask for the correct one.
Process (step-by-step)
Phase 1: Read and parse
Purpose: Load the SKILL.md and extract structural elements.
Steps:
- Step 1.1: Read the file
- Load the full SKILL.md content
- Parse YAML frontmatter into key-value pairs
- Identify all H2 (
##) and H3 (###) sections present - Output: Parsed frontmatter + section inventory
Phase 1 checkpoint:
- File successfully read
- Frontmatter parsed
- Section headers cataloged
Phase 2: Grade each dimension
Purpose: Evaluate the skill against 8 quality dimensions.
Steps:
-
Dimension 1: Frontmatter completeness
- Check for required fields:
name,version,author,last_updated,description - Check for agentic fields:
dependencies,outputs,triggers,review_gate - PASS: All required + agentic fields present with non-empty values
- WARN: Required fields present but agentic fields missing
- FAIL: Any required field missing
- Check for required fields:
-
Dimension 2: Trigger quality
- Check for
## Claude Code Triggerssection - Count "Invoke this skill when" trigger phrases
- Check for "Do NOT invoke when" anti-triggers
- PASS: 4+ trigger phrases AND 2+ anti-triggers
- WARN: 2-3 trigger phrases OR only 1 anti-trigger
- FAIL: Missing section OR fewer than 2 triggers OR no anti-triggers
- Check for
-
Dimension 3: Input definition
- Check for
## Input Requirementssection - Look for separation between Required and Optional inputs
- Look for Input Validation Checklist
- Look for "If inputs are missing" handling
- PASS: All four elements present
- WARN: Required/Optional separated but no validation checklist
- FAIL: Missing section OR no input/output distinction
- Check for
-
Dimension 4: Process structure
- Check for
## Processsection with named phases - Each phase should have: Purpose, Steps, Checkpoint
- Count phases (minimum 2 expected)
- PASS: 2+ phases, each with purpose + steps + checkpoint
- WARN: Phases present but missing checkpoints
- FAIL: No process section OR only 1 phase OR no steps
- Check for
-
Dimension 5: Anti-hallucination guardrails
- Check for
## Anti-Hallucination Guardrailssection - Count guardrails listed
- Check if guardrails are skill-specific (not generic copy-paste)
- Look for placeholder format definition
- PASS: 3+ skill-specific guardrails + placeholder format
- WARN: 1-2 guardrails OR guardrails are generic
- FAIL: Missing section OR zero guardrails
- Check for
-
Dimension 6: Output format
- Check for
## Output Formatsection - Look for output structure definition (headers, formatting rules)
- For copy skills: check for character count requirements
- For analytical / data-verdict skills (audit, scoring, ranking, reporting): check for a report-format contract — a named output structure, a literal comparable template on recurring deliverables, and a bound significance floor (
quantitative-evidence-floors.md: verdict states the volume behind it, synthesizes rather than dumping rows). WARN if the skill renders verdicts from counts but ships no floor or comparable format. - PASS: Clear output structure with formatting rules
- WARN: Section exists but structure is vague
- FAIL: Missing section
- Check for
-
Dimension 7: Quality checklist
- Check for
## Quality Checklistsection - Look for subsections: Content Quality, Format Quality, Completeness
- Count checklist items
- PASS: 3 subsections with 3+ items each
- WARN: Checklist exists but fewer than 3 subsections
- FAIL: Missing section OR fewer than 3 total items
- Check for
-
Dimension 8: Skill-catalog alignment
- Read
.claude/skills/meta/catalog/skill-catalog/SKILL.md - Check if this skill name appears in the catalog
- If listed: check review_gate in SKILL.md matches catalog entry
- Check if dependencies listed match skill's Input Requirements
- PASS: Skill registered in catalog with matching metadata
- WARN: Skill registered but metadata doesn't match
- FAIL: Skill not found in catalog
- Read
Phase 2 checkpoint:
- All 8 dimensions scored
- Each score has a specific finding (not just PASS/FAIL)
- Senior-engineer test: would a senior engineer say this skill is overcomplicated? If yes, flag for slim refactor regardless of dimension scores.
Phase 3: Generate report
Purpose: Compile the review into a structured report.
Steps:
-
Step 3.1: Calculate overall score
- Count PASS, WARN, FAIL across all 8 dimensions
- Overall verdict: ALL PASS = "Ready to ship", any FAIL = "Needs fixes", all WARN or better = "Acceptable with notes"
- Output: Score summary
-
Step 3.2: Write the report
- Follow the output format below
- List critical issues (FAIL) first, then warnings
- Include specific recommendations for each issue
- Output: Complete review report
Skill Review: [skill-name]
Date: YYYY-MM-DD File: [path to SKILL.md] Verdict: [Ready to ship | Acceptable with notes | Needs fixes]
Score: X PASS / Y WARN / Z FAIL
| # | Dimension | Score | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frontmatter | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 2 | Triggers | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 3 | Inputs | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 4 | Process | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 5 | Guardrails | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 6 | Output format | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 7 | Quality checklist | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
| 8 | Catalog alignment | PASS/WARN/FAIL | [one-line finding] |
Critical issues (FAIL)
[Details on each FAIL with specific line references and fix instructions]
Warnings (WARN)
[Details on each WARN with improvement suggestions]
Recommended updates
- [Specific action to take]
- [Specific action to take]
---
## Anti-Hallucination Guardrails
1. **Only report what's actually in the file:** Do not assume a section exists if you can't find the header. Grep for the exact header text.
2. **Count explicitly:** When reporting "4 trigger phrases found," list them. Don't approximate.
3. **Quote the file:** When flagging an issue, reference the specific line or section where the problem is.
4. **Don't invent recommendations from outside context:** Recommendations must be based on what the canonical template (`.claude/skills/_schema/SKILL.template.md`) + `AUTHORING.md` require, not general best practices.
---
## Quality Checklist (pre-delivery)
### Content quality
- [ ] All 8 dimensions actually evaluated (not skipped)
- [ ] Each finding references specific evidence from the file
- [ ] Recommendations are actionable (not vague "improve this")
### Format quality
- [ ] Score table formatted correctly
- [ ] FAIL items listed before WARN items
- [ ] Verdict matches score (no FAIL = "Ready to ship" is wrong if there are FAILs)
### Completeness
- [ ] Overall score calculated correctly
- [ ] All critical issues have fix instructions
- [ ] Report includes the file path reviewed
---
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 36
- Forks
- 14
- Last commit
- Jul 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
skill-reviewer-matteotitta- Source
- github.com/matteotitta/genesys-skills