CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

evaluate-sdlc-layers

Validate and iterate on the SDLC Layer Separation Architecture implementation across the check categories defined in its Evaluation Checklist — cross-references, doc completeness, knowledge-explorer layer filters, research entry metadata, integration points, and plan consistency. Produces a structured findings report and optionally applies safe fixes. Use when validating a first-pass implementation, before claiming layer work complete, auditing layer docs or schema, or running --dry-run to preview findings without changes.

66

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Evaluate SDLC Layers

Systematically evaluate the SDLC Layer Separation Architecture implementation and support iterative improvement. Treats the implementation as first-pass until validated.

Arguments

  • --dry-run — Run all checks, produce report only. Do not apply fixes.
  • --fix — After evaluation, apply safe fixes for broken references, missing metadata, or obvious gaps. Report what was changed.
  • (no args) — Evaluate and produce report; offer to fix or delegate fixes.

Evaluation Checklist

Run each check and record PASS / FAIL / SKIP with evidence.

1. Cross-Reference Validation

For each linked path in plugins/development-harness/docs/sdlc-layers/ and related docs:

  • sam-definition.md — exists at plugins/development-harness/skills/work-backlog-item/references/sam-definition.md
  • plugins/development-harness/CLAUDE.md — exists
  • stateless-agent-methodology/research/arl/PROVENANCE.md — exists (sibling repo or configured path)
  • Layer 0 docs → TASK_FILE_FORMAT.md — exists at plugins/development-harness/docs/TASK_FILE_FORMAT.md
  • Layer 1 → role-resolution-protocol.md — exists in development-harness
  • Layer-0 redirect stubs (artifact-conventions.md, task-file-format.md, sam-pipeline.md, arl-touchpoints.md) contain redirect pointers to canonical locations. Validate each redirect target exists.

Evidence: List each path checked and result (exists / 404 / wrong content).


2. Doc Completeness

  • Layer 0 content files (6): README, rt-ica-gate, verification-protocol, evidence-discipline, orchestrator-discipline, context-fit-complexity
  • Layer 0 redirect stubs (4): sam-pipeline, arl-touchpoints, artifact-conventions, task-file-format — each must contain a redirect pointing to its canonical skill reference location
  • Layer 1: All 5 docs present (README, layer-1-overview, linting-discovery-protocol, workflow-pattern-taxonomy, harness-role-mapping)
  • ARL: arl-meta-layer.md, arl-human-probing-design.md

Evidence: Glob or Read results for each expected file.


3. Knowledge-Explorer Layer Filter

  • uv run research/knowledge-explorer.py list --layer 0 — returns entries with layer: "0"
  • uv run research/knowledge-explorer.py list --layer 1 — returns entries with layer: "1"
  • Entries without layer metadata are excluded when --layer is used (expected)

Evidence: Paste command output for each.


4. Research Entry Layer Metadata

  • evaluation-testing/harness-engineering-openai.md — has layer: "0"
  • developer-tools/copier-astral.md — has layer: "1"
  • research/README.md — has "Layer Mapping" section

Evidence: Grep for layer: in frontmatter of each.


5. Integration Points

  • work-backlog-item SKILL, groom subcommand (references/workflows/groom/start.md) — documents ARL human-probing integration; references arl-human-probing-design
  • role-resolution-protocol.md — has "Layer 0 gates apply before role resolution"
  • plugins/development-harness/CLAUDE.md — references layer model

Evidence: Grep or Read for key phrases.


6. Consistency with Plan

  • Plan deliverables (from attached plan) — compare File and Directory Changes table to actual files
  • Dependency order — Layer 0 → Layer 1 → Research → SAM/ARL → ARL probing → work-backlog-item

Evidence: List any plan items not yet implemented or diverged.


Output Format

Produce a structured report:

## SDLC Layer Evaluation Report
Date: {YYYY-MM-DD}

### Summary
- Cross-Reference: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL} — {brief}
- Doc Completeness: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL}
- Knowledge-Explorer: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL}
- Research Metadata: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL}
- Integration Points: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL}
- Plan Consistency: {PASS|FAIL|PARTIAL}

### Findings
1. [Category] {finding} — {suggested fix}
2. ...

### Recommended Actions
- [ ] {action 1}
- [ ] {action 2}

Iteration

After evaluation:

  1. If --fix: Apply safe fixes (broken paths, missing frontmatter fields, obvious typos). Report each change.
  2. If no --fix: Present findings; offer to create backlog items or apply fixes.
  3. Re-run: After fixes, re-run evaluation to confirm improvements.

Experiments

Flow experiments and learnings live in sam-flow-experiments. Clone via SSH: git clone git@github.com:Jamie-BitFlight/sam-flow-experiments.git. When iterating, consider running experiments against concept fixtures to validate changes.


References

  • SDLC Layers
  • verify-done — evidence discipline
  • work-backlog-item — orchestration pattern (groom subcommand: references/workflows/groom/start.md)
Repository
Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills
Last updated
First committed

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.