Rehan-Ul-Haq Skill Validator
Validate any skill against production-level quality criteria.
Validation Workflow
Phase 1: Gather Context
- Read the skill's SKILL.md completely
- Identify skill type from frontmatter description:
- Builder skill (creates artifacts)
- Guide skill (provides instructions)
- Automation skill (executes workflows)
- Analyzer skill (extracts insights)
- Validator skill (enforces quality)
- Hybrid skill (combination of above)
- Read all reference files in
references/directory - Check for assets/scripts directories
- Note frontmatter fields (
name,description,allowed-tools,model)
Phase 2: Apply Criteria
Evaluate against 9 criteria categories. Each criterion scores 0-3:
- 0: Missing/Absent
- 1: Present but inadequate
- 2: Adequate implementation
- 3: Excellent implementation
Criteria Categories
1. Structure & Anatomy (Weight: 12%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| SKILL.md exists | Root file present |
| Line count | <500 lines (context is precious) |
| Frontmatter complete | name and description present in YAML |
| Name constraints | Lowercase, numbers, hyphens only; ≤64 chars; matches directory |
| Description format | [What] + [When] format; ≤1024 chars |
| Description style | Third-person: "This skill should be used when..." |
| No extraneous files | No README.md, CHANGELOG.md, LICENSE in skill dir |
| Progressive disclosure | Details in references/, not bloated SKILL.md |
| Asset organization | Templates in assets/, scripts in scripts/ |
| Large file guidance | If references >10k words, grep patterns in SKILL.md |
Fail condition: Missing SKILL.md or >800 lines = automatic fail
2. Content Quality (Weight: 15%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Conciseness | No verbose explanations, context is public good |
| Imperative form | Instructions use "Do X" not "You should do X" |
| Appropriate freedom | Constraints where needed, flexibility where safe |
| Scope clarity | Clear what skill does AND does not do |
| No hallucination risk | No instructions that encourage making up info |
| Output specification | Clear expected outputs defined |
3. User Interaction (Weight: 12%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Clarification triggers | Asks questions before acting on ambiguity |
| Required vs optional | Distinguishes must-know from nice-to-know |
| Graceful handling | What to do when user doesn't answer |
| No over-asking | Doesn't ask obvious or inferrable questions |
| Question pacing | Avoids too many questions in single message |
| Context awareness | Uses available context before asking |
Key pattern to look for:
## Required Clarifications
1. Question about X
2. Question about Y
## Optional Clarifications
3. Question about Z (if relevant)
Note: Avoid asking too many questions in a single message.
4. Documentation & References (Weight: 10%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Source URLs | Official documentation links provided |
| Reference files | Complex details in references/ not main file |
| Fetch guidance | Instructions to fetch docs for unlisted patterns |
| Version awareness | Notes about checking for latest patterns |
| Example coverage | Good/bad examples for key patterns |
Key pattern to look for:
| Resource | URL | Use For |
|----------|-----|---------|
| Official Docs | https://... | Complex cases |
5. Domain Standards (Weight: 10%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Best practices | Follows domain conventions (e.g., WCAG, OWASP) |
| Enforcement mechanism | Checklists, validation steps, must-verify items |
| Anti-patterns | Lists what NOT to do |
| Quality gates | Output checklist before delivery |
Key pattern to look for:
### Must Follow
- [ ] Requirement 1
- [ ] Requirement 2
### Must Avoid
- Antipattern 1
- Antipattern 2
6. Technical Robustness (Weight: 8%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Error handling | Guidance for failure scenarios |
| Security considerations | Input validation, secrets handling if relevant |
| Dependencies | External tools/APIs documented |
| Edge cases | Common edge cases addressed |
| Testability | Can outputs be verified? |
7. Maintainability (Weight: 8%)
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Modularity | References are self-contained topics |
| Update path | Easy to update when standards change |
| No hardcoded values | Uses placeholders/variables where appropriate |
| Clear organization | Logical section ordering |
8. Zero-Shot Implementation (Weight: 12%)
Skills should enable single-interaction implementation with embedded expertise.
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Before Implementation section | Context gathering guidance present |
| Codebase context | Guidance to scan existing structure/patterns |
| Conversation context | Uses discussed requirements/decisions |
| Embedded expertise | Domain knowledge in references/, not runtime discovery |
| User-only questions | Only asks for USER requirements, not domain knowledge |
Key pattern to look for:
## Before Implementation
Gather context to ensure successful implementation:
| Source | Gather |
|--------|--------|
| **Codebase** | Existing structure, patterns, conventions |
| **Conversation** | User's specific requirements |
| **Skill References** | Domain patterns from `references/` |
| **User Guidelines** | Project-specific conventions |
Red flag: Skill instructs to "research" or "discover" domain knowledge at runtime instead of embedding it.
9. Reusability (Weight: 13%)
Skills should handle variations, not single requirements.
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Handles variations | Not hardcoded to single use case |
| Variable elements | Clarifications capture what VARIES |
| Constant patterns | Domain best practices encoded as constants |
| Not requirement-specific | Avoids hardcoded data, tools, configs |
| Abstraction level | Appropriate generalization for domain |
Good example:
"Create visualizations - adaptable to data shape, chart type, library"
Bad example (too specific):
"Create bar chart with sales data using Recharts"
Key check: Does the skill work for multiple use cases within its domain?
Type-Specific Validation
After scoring general criteria, verify type-specific requirements:
| Type | Must Have |
|---|---|
| Builder | Clarifications, Output Spec, Domain Standards, Output Checklist |
| Guide | Workflow Steps, Examples (Good/Bad), Official Docs links |
| Automation | Scripts in scripts/, Dependencies, Error Handling, I/O Spec |
| Analyzer | Analysis Scope, Evaluation Criteria, Output Format, Synthesis |
| Validator | Quality Criteria, Scoring Rubric, Thresholds, Remediation |
Scoring: Deduct 10 points if type-specific requirements missing for identified type.
Scoring Guide
Category Scores
Calculate each category score:
Category Score = (Sum of criterion scores) / (Max possible) * 100
Overall Score
Overall = Σ(Category Score × Weight)
Rating Thresholds
| Score | Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | Production | Ready for wide use |
| 75-89 | Good | Minor improvements needed |
| 60-74 | Adequate | Functional but needs work |
| 40-59 | Developing | Significant gaps |
| 0-39 | Incomplete | Major rework required |
Output Format
Generate validation report:
# Skill Validation Report: [skill-name]
**Rating**: [Production/Good/Adequate/Developing/Incomplete]
**Overall Score**: [X]/100
## Summary
[2-3 sentence assessment]
## Category Scores
| Category | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Structure & Anatomy | X/100 | 12% | X |
| Content Quality | X/100 | 15% | X |
| User Interaction | X/100 | 12% | X |
| Documentation | X/100 | 10% | X |
| Domain Standards | X/100 | 10% | X |
| Technical Robustness | X/100 | 8% | X |
| Maintainability | X/100 | 8% | X |
| Zero-Shot Implementation | X/100 | 12% | X |
| Reusability | X/100 | 13% | X |
| **Type-Specific Deduction** | -X | - | -X |
## Critical Issues (if any)
- [Issue requiring immediate fix]
## Improvement Recommendations
1. **High Priority**: [Specific action]
2. **Medium Priority**: [Specific action]
3. **Low Priority**: [Specific action]
## Strengths
- [What skill does well]
Quick Validation Checklist
For rapid assessment, check these critical items:
Structure & Frontmatter
- SKILL.md <500 lines
- Frontmatter: name (≤64 chars, lowercase, hyphens) + description (≤1024 chars)
- Description uses third-person style ("This skill should be used when...")
- No README.md/CHANGELOG.md in skill directory
Content & Interaction
- Has clarification questions (Required vs Optional)
- Has output specification
- Has official documentation links
Zero-Shot & Reusability
- Has "Before Implementation" section (context gathering)
- Domain expertise embedded in
references/(not runtime discovery) - Handles variations (not requirement-specific)
Type-Specific (check based on skill type)
- Builder: Clarifications + Output Spec + Standards + Checklist
- Guide: Workflow + Examples + Docs
- Automation: Scripts + Dependencies + Error Handling
- Analyzer: Scope + Criteria + Output Format
- Validator: Criteria + Scoring + Thresholds + Remediation
If 10+ checked: Likely Production (90+) If 7-9 checked: Likely Good (75-89) If 5-6 checked: Likely Adequate (60-74) If <5 checked: Needs significant work
Reference Files
| File | When to Read |
|---|---|
references/detailed-criteria.md |
Deep evaluation of specific criterion |
references/scoring-examples.md |
Example validations for calibration |
references/improvement-patterns.md |
Common fixes for common issues |
Usage Examples
Validate a skill
Validate the creating-chatgpt-widgets skill against production criteria
Quick audit
Quick validation check on mcp-builder skill
Focused review
Check if skill-creator skill has proper user interaction patterns