bash-defensive-patterns

Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts. Use when writing robust shell scripts, CI/CD pipelines, or system utilities requiring fault tolerance and safety.

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

50%

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

The body is concise and well-structured but lacks concrete, executable guidance — the Instructions section describes steps abstractly and defers all real patterns to a referenced playbook that is not actually present. Workflows also miss the validation checkpoints the rubric expects for destructive operations.

Suggestions

Add at least one executable example per key instruction (e.g., `set -euo pipefail`, `trap 'cleanup' EXIT`) instead of deferring all concrete patterns to the missing playbook.

Create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` (or remove the dangling reference) and consolidate the duplicated pointer so progressive disclosure actually resolves to real content.

Insert an explicit validate-then-proceed checkpoint in the Instructions (e.g., 'Run the script with `bash -n` and a dry-run flag before destructive execution') to satisfy the destructive-operation feedback-loop expectation.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with short sections and no padding about what Bash is or library tutorials; the only minor bloat is the near-duplicate of the playbook reference in both the inline sentence and the Resources section.	3 / 3
Actionability	Instructions are abstract directives ("Enable strict mode and safe defaults", "Validate inputs, quote variables, and handle files safely") with no concrete commands or code (e.g., no `set -euo pipefail` or `trap`), describing rather than instructing, which matches the level-1 anchor.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear numbered sequence is present, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops for destructive operations, which the rubric says caps this dimension at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized and the reference is one level deep, but `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle and the pointer is duplicated inline and in Resources, so the disclosure leads nowhere.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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 is strong: it explicitly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with natural trigger terms and a distinct defensive-programming niche. Its only weakness is specificity, as it names the domain and a broad goal rather than enumerating multiple concrete techniques.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts" names the domain and a broad action, but does not list multiple concrete actions (e.g., specific techniques), matching the 'names domain and some actions' anchor rather than the multi-action level 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what ("Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts") and an explicit when ("Use when writing robust shell scripts, CI/CD pipelines, or system utilities"), satisfying both halves required for level 3.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Triggers like "robust shell scripts", "CI/CD pipelines", and "system utilities" are natural phrases a user would say and cover the scripting domain well, matching the good-coverage level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The defensive-programming / fault-tolerance framing is a clear niche with distinct triggers, only slightly overlapping with generic scripting or CI/CD skills, which keeps it at level 3.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 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
Commit: 5e71bba

Reviewed: 3 days 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.