Repository navigation
ci: enforce the first-party skill authoring rules - #681
Conversation
Add check-skill-authoring.sh for skills authored in this repository: references sit one level deep, every Markdown reference is linked from the entry file, a worked example is linked from the entry file or the reference that explains it, and the description stays within 600 characters. Exceptions are recorded with a reason and can only shrink. Self-test the new check, add the missing failing cases for the existing 500-line / 20000-byte entry-file budget, run both in CI and describe them in the lifecycle and validation guides. Part of #678 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@coderabbitai review |
User trial at I used the check the way an author meets it, on a scratch copy of this head:
The self-test covers the rest (41 cases), including the exception record only shrinking. I also broke the check in four ways (no code-fence handling, counting bytes, ignoring unused exceptions, no nesting rule) and the self-test caught each one. In CI at this head, the new step and its self-test both ran and passed, along with the three new cases for the existing entry-file size limit. Two things this change does not do, both recorded: the five existing exceptions are tracked in #680, and the acceptance-scenario check is handed to #651, which decides where scenarios live. 🤖 Generated with Claude Code |
Action not completed
|
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. Next included review available in 56 minutes. View limit details
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. |
@codex review |
Codex Review Summary: ✅ CompletedThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Why
The rules for writing our own skills were written down, but four of them were only kept when an author remembered. A skill that breaks them costs every session: an over-long description is loaded each time, and a reference nobody links is never read.
What
Every pull request now checks our own skills for references that are nested or not linked from the entry file and for descriptions over the agreed length, and reports each description's length. The five places that do not meet the rules today are recorded with a reason and tracked separately, and that record can only shrink.
Fixes #678
🤖 Generated with Claude Code