tessl-labs/intent-integrity-kit
Closing the intent-to-code chasm - specification-driven development with BDD verification chain
Overall
score
96%
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
iikit-bugfix
skills/iikit-bugfix/SKILL.md
Activation
100%This is a well-crafted skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides specific concrete actions, uses natural trigger terms users would actually say, includes an explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple scenarios, and clearly distinguishes itself from related skills by specifying its scope relative to the specification process.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'creates a structured bugs.md record', 'generates fix tasks in tasks.md', and 'imports from or creates GitHub issues'. These are clear, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (creates bugs.md record, generates fix tasks, handles GitHub issues) AND when with explicit 'Use when...' clause covering multiple trigger scenarios (fixing bugs, reporting defects, importing GitHub issues, triaging errors). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'bug', 'defect', 'GitHub issue', 'error', 'fixing a bug', 'reporting', 'triaging'. Good coverage of variations users might naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused on bug reporting workflow with distinct triggers (bugs.md, fix tasks, GitHub issues). The explicit mention of 'without running the full specification process' helps distinguish it from broader specification or task management skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%This is a well-crafted skill with excellent workflow clarity and actionability. The multi-step process is clearly sequenced with appropriate validation checkpoints and error handling. Minor verbosity from duplicating Unix/Windows commands throughout could be consolidated, but overall the skill effectively guides Claude through a complex bug reporting workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundant explanations (e.g., explaining both Unix and Windows commands for every step when a single note about cross-platform would suffice). The step-by-step format is appropriate for the complexity but could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash/PowerShell commands, specific JSON parsing expectations, concrete markdown templates, and exact file paths. The task generation templates are copy-paste ready with clear variable substitution patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-step workflow with clear sequencing (numbered steps 0-12), explicit validation checkpoints (Step 4 validate feature, Step 10.5 verify hash), and error recovery paths. The branching logic (GitHub vs text input, TDD vs non-TDD) is clearly delineated. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections, references to external templates (bugs-template.md, constitution-loading.md) that are one level deep, and a comprehensive error handling table. The main flow is readable without needing to jump to references for basic understanding. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.