backtesting-frameworks

Build robust, production-grade backtesting systems that avoid common pitfalls and produce reliable strategy performance estimates.

Quality

59%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/backtesting-frameworks/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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.

The body is well-structured and concise with clear use/do-not-use and safety sections, but it stays at a high-level directive level without executable detail, validation checkpoints, or a present referenced playbook. Adding the missing playbook and concrete verification steps would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Create the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` (or correct the path) so the progressive-disclosure reference resolves to a real file.

Add an explicit validation/verification step in the Instructions (e.g., "sanity-check results against a benchmark and confirm no look-ahead bias before reporting metrics").

Include at least one concrete, copy-paste-ready snippet (e.g., a minimal event-driven loop or walk-forward split) to raise actionability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with concise bullets and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the only padding is the opening tagline duplicating the description.	4 / 5
Actionability	Directives are reasonably specific (point-in-time data pipelines, train/validation/test splits, walk-forward testing), but there is no executable detail and concrete specifics are deferred to the referenced playbook.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps are listed in a sensible sequence (define hypothesis → data pipelines → simulation → splits/walk-forward), but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops for the analysis workflow.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well organized and the playbook reference is clearly signaled and one level deep, but the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle, breaking navigation.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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.

The description conveys a clear, specific niche and decent trigger terms, but it omits any explicit "when to use" guidance, which caps completeness. It is solid but falls short of the strongest examples that pair a what-clause with a concrete when-clause.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when building trading strategy backtests, validating strategy performance, or implementing walk-forward analysis."

Replace the generic "avoid common pitfalls" with concrete capabilities (e.g., "survivorship-bias-safe point-in-time data, walk-forward validation, realistic cost modeling").

Add common synonyms/users' phrasing ("backtest", "quant strategy", "historical simulation") to broaden trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and a couple of concrete actions ("build robust, production-grade backtesting systems", "produce reliable strategy performance estimates"), but "avoid common pitfalls" is generic and coverage is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Clearly states what the skill does, but there is no "Use when…" clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say ("backtesting", "trading strategy", "strategy performance"), though synonyms like "backtest", "quant", or "historical simulation" are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Backtesting systems" is a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, with only minor overlap against general trading/finance skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Path: skills/backtesting-frameworks/SKILL.md
Commit: 1f67c44

Reviewed: about 16 hours 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.