judgment-day

Trigger: judgment day, dual review, adversarial review, juzgar. Run explicit blind dual review with at most two scoped fix/re-judgment rounds.

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured orchestration skill body with clear sequencing, validation checkpoints, and clean progressive disclosure. Minor conciseness and actionability gaps keep it just short of perfect.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Dense and directive with minimal padding and no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, though the delivery-authority/receipt passages are slightly elaborate and could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete guidance with named actors (jd-judge-a, jd-judge-b, jd-fix-agent), a decision table, and a numbered sequence; minor gaps because literal invocation commands are deferred to references.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear numbered sequence with explicit validation/escalation checkpoints in the Decision Gates table and bounded fix->re-judge feedback loops for an operation that auto-applies severe fixes.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Concise well-sectioned overview pointing one level deep to a real references/prompts-and-formats.md file, with a clearly signaled optional shared-contract reference; easy to navigate.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, specific description with natural trigger terms and a distinct niche. The main weakness is the 'when' guidance being a keyword list rather than an explicit 'Use when...' clause.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and several concrete actions (blind dual review, scoped fix/re-judgment rounds with a bounded count), with only minor coverage gaps; not a comprehensive multi-action list.	4 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear 'what' (run blind dual review with bounded fix/re-judgment rounds) and explicit trigger guidance via the 'Trigger:' list, but the 'when' is a bare keyword list rather than a full 'Use when...' clause.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Explicit natural trigger terms ('judgment day', 'dual review', 'adversarial review') plus a synonym ('juzgar') give good keyword coverage, though a few natural phrasings are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	A clearly named niche tool with distinct trigger terms, minimal risk of firing for unrelated skills.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 suspicious	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai
Path: internal/assets/skills/judgment-day/SKILL.md
Commit: a245f26

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.