
Skill Forge Review
- 31 installs
- 84 repo stars
- Updated April 10, 2026
- agricidaniel/skill-forge
skill-forge-review is a Claude Code skill that audits an existing Claude Code skill, scores it 0-100 and recommends prioritized improvements.
About
skill-forge-review is a Claude Code skill that audits and validates an existing Claude Code skill for quality, triggering accuracy and structure. It scores the skill on a 0-100 scale across weighted categories and outputs prioritized improvement recommendations plus a trigger eval set. A developer uses it before publishing to confirm a skill is well-formed and will activate correctly.
- Audits an existing Claude Code skill and scores it 0-100
- Checks frontmatter, triggering, instruction quality and structure
- Generates a trigger eval set with should- and should-not-trigger queries
Skill Forge Review by the numbers
- 31 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #407 of 782 Skill Development skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
skill-forge-review capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- skill review · skill validation · trigger eval generation
What skill-forge-review says it does
Audit and validate existing Claude Code skills for quality, triggering accuracy, structure compliance, and best practices. Scores skills on a 0-100 scale and provides prioritized improvement recom
5 queries that SHOULD trigger the skill
npx skills add https://github.com/agricidaniel/skill-forge --skill skill-forge-reviewAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 31 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 84 |
| Last updated | April 10, 2026 |
| Repository | agricidaniel/skill-forge ↗ |
What it does
Audit an existing Claude Code skill, score it 0-100 and get prioritized fixes plus a trigger eval set.
When should I use this skill?
user says review skill, audit skill, check skill, validate skill, or skill quality
What you get
A 0-100 health score, prioritized fixes and a trigger eval set for ongoing testing.
- skill health score
- prioritized recommendations
- trigger eval set
By the numbers
- 9-step review process
- 0-100 scoring scale
- 6 weighted scoring categories
Files
Skill Review & Validation
Process
Step 1: Locate Skill Files
Accept input as:
- Path to a skill directory
- Skill name (search in
~/.claude/skills/) - URL to a GitHub repository
Read all .md files, scripts, and asset files.
Step 2: Structure Validation
Run python scripts/validate_skill.py <path> for programmatic checks.
Manual verification:
- [ ] SKILL.md exists (exact case)
- [ ] No README.md inside skill folder
- [ ] Folder name matches
namefield - [ ] Valid kebab-case naming (1-64 chars)
- [ ] No "claude" or "anthropic" in name
Step 3: Frontmatter Audit
| Check | Pass Criteria |
|---|---|
| Name format | kebab-case, 1-64 chars, no leading/trailing hyphens |
| Description present | Non-empty, 1-1024 characters |
| Description has WHAT | Explains capabilities |
| Description has WHEN | Includes trigger phrases |
| Description has keywords | Domain-specific terms included |
| No XML tags | No < or > characters |
| Optional fields valid | license, compatibility (<500 chars), metadata |
Step 4: Triggering Analysis
Assess the description for activation quality:
Under-triggering risks:
- Too generic ("Helps with projects")
- Missing common paraphrases
- No domain keywords
- Missing file type mentions (if relevant)
Over-triggering risks:
- Too broad ("Processes documents")
- Overlaps with built-in Claude capabilities
- Missing negative triggers for disambiguation
Generate test queries:
- 5 queries that SHOULD trigger the skill
- 5 queries that SHOULD NOT trigger
- 3 edge cases (ambiguous queries)
Step 5: Instruction Quality
| Criterion | Score (0-10) |
|---|---|
| Specificity | Are instructions actionable? (not "validate properly") |
| Completeness | All workflows covered? |
| Error handling | Common failures addressed? |
| Examples | Concrete examples provided? |
| Progressive disclosure | Detailed docs in references/ not SKILL.md? |
| Length | Under 500 lines / 5000 tokens? |
| Cross-references | Clear links to references/scripts? |
Step 6: Architecture Review (Multi-skill)
For skills with sub-skills:
- [ ] Main skill has clear routing table
- [ ] Sub-skills have focused responsibilities
- [ ] Cross-references are valid (files exist)
- [ ] Naming follows
parent-childconvention - [ ] Shared references in parent, not duplicated
- [ ] Agents have clear roles (if Tier 4)
Step 7: Script Quality (if present)
- [ ] Docstrings with purpose, input, output
- [ ] CLI interface (argparse or similar)
- [ ] Structured output (JSON)
- [ ] Error handling (try/except with clear messages)
- [ ] No hardcoded paths or secrets
- [ ] Minimal dependencies
Step 8: Generate Skill Health Score
Scoring methodology (0-100):
| Category | Weight | Checks |
|---|---|---|
| Frontmatter Quality | 25% | Name, description, format |
| Trigger Accuracy | 20% | WHAT + WHEN + keywords |
| Instruction Quality | 25% | Specificity, completeness, examples |
| Structure Compliance | 15% | File naming, organization, references |
| Script Quality | 10% | If applicable (full marks if no scripts needed) |
| Progressive Disclosure | 5% | Proper use of 3-level system |
Step 9: Generate Trigger Eval Set
After reviewing, generate a structured trigger eval set for ongoing testing:
1. Run python scripts/generate_eval_set.py <path> to auto-generate a starter set 2. Review and refine the generated queries:
- Ensure 8-10 should-trigger queries cover different phrasings and edge cases
- Ensure 8-10 should-not-trigger queries are near-misses (not obviously irrelevant)
- Include casual speech, typos, and uncommon domain uses in should-trigger set
3. Save the eval set to evals/evals.json in the skill directory
Good queries are realistic and specific (include file paths, context, domain details). Bad queries are overly generic ("format this data") or obviously irrelevant.
4. Run python scripts/optimize_description.py <path> --eval-set evals/evals.json to score the current description and get improvement suggestions 5. Recommend running /skill-forge eval <path> for full functional evaluation
Step 10: Generate Report
# Skill Review: [name]
## Health Score: [X]/100
## Summary
[2-3 sentence assessment]
## Scores by Category
| Category | Score | Notes |
|----------|-------|-------|
| Frontmatter | X/25 | [issues] |
| Triggering | X/20 | [issues] |
| Instructions | X/25 | [issues] |
| Structure | X/15 | [issues] |
| Scripts | X/10 | [issues] |
| Disclosure | X/5 | [issues] |
## Critical Issues (fix immediately)
- [issue 1]
- [issue 2]
## High Priority (fix within 1 week)
- [issue 1]
## Recommendations
- [suggestion 1]
- [suggestion 2]
## Suggested Test Queries
### Should Trigger
1. [query]
2. [query]
3. [query]
### Should NOT Trigger
1. [query]
2. [query]
3. [query]Related skills
FAQ
What score does skill-forge-review produce?
A 0-100 skill health score across six weighted categories: frontmatter, trigger accuracy, instruction quality, structure, script quality and progressive disclosure.
Does it help with triggering?
Yes, it analyses under- and over-triggering risks and generates a trigger eval set of should- and should-not-trigger queries.