CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

canonical/mason

Agent kit for working on canonical/chisel-releases. Cross-agent skills + scripts for authoring and reviewing chisel slice definition files.

81

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

75%

Average score across 5 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

_verification.mdskills/chisel-slicer/kb/

Verification and completion

Include every dependency package added or changed in verification. Keep check status separate from finding severity.

  • Passed: the check ran and met its acceptance criteria. Static checks do not prove installability or runtime behaviour.
  • Failed: evidence shows a defect: SDF blocks, unjustified warnings, missing or malformed tests, unfinished scaffolds, inadequate assertions, unresolved source conflicts, or a cut/spread failure caused by the proposed change. Report the defect and fix it when changes are in scope.
  • Unavailable: the check could not establish a result because a tool, backend, input, archive or documentation endpoint was inaccessible, or a checker crashed. Record the cause, affected scope and command or source needed to complete verification. A denied fetch is not evidence of package absence.

Network access is required. Report network failures and access refusals as unavailable; do not work around them with offline fallbacks, cached upstream substitutes or test-specific behaviour. Do not turn an observed product failure into an unavailable check. Inspect diagnostics when a cut or spread command fails: non-zero exit alone does not distinguish a defect from an inaccessible service.

What blocks work

Stop the affected work when the checkout or target is unknown, maintenance cannot be established for a write, required package contents or dependency providers cannot be inspected, or a required dependency cycle remains unresolved. Do not invent missing evidence. Independent checks may still proceed.

Missing runtime tools/backends or unreachable documentation can leave checks pending after the files are written and statically checked. They never excuse omitting tests. Incomplete release discovery leaves forward-port coverage unverified; it does not establish that a release is EOL or that no ports remain.

Completion and reports

  • Change complete: all intended SDFs and tests are written, coverage reviewed, and applicable checks passed with no unresolved defects.
  • Ready for remaining verification: the files and available checks are finished, but only permitted unavailable checks remain. Name them explicitly; do not claim full completion or a passing runtime test.
  • Blocked: a defect cannot be fixed in scope, or missing evidence prevents safe changes. State the unresolved requirement.
  • Review verdict: request changes for demonstrated blocking or should-fix defects; otherwise use incomplete when required evidence is unavailable, or approve when the review is complete. A request-changes report must still list unavailable checks. Assess the whole task before choosing the verdict.

For each applicable check, record passed/failed/unavailable, evidence, release and architecture where relevant. Include justified warnings, representative coverage choices, verification gaps and remaining forward ports. Existing CI results count only when they cover the reviewed revision and relevant scope; future CI is not evidence of success.

README.md

tile.json