.claude/skills/skill-validator/SKILL.md
Ensure Claude Code skills meet quality standards through validation operations for structure, content, patterns, and production readiness. Task-based validation with pass/fail criteria, automated checks, and compliance reporting. Use when validating skills before deployment, ensuring standards compliance, certifying production readiness, or quality gating skill releases.
npx skillsauth add adaptationio/skrillz skill-validatorInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
skill-validator ensures Claude Code skills meet established quality standards through systematic validation operations. Unlike review-multi (which scores 1-5), skill-validator provides pass/fail validation against minimum standards for production deployment.
Purpose: Quality gate for skill deployment - ensure minimum standards met
The 4 Validation Operations:
Difference from review-multi:
Use Together: review-multi for comprehensive assessment, skill-validator for go/no-go decisions
Use skill-validator when:
Purpose: Ensure skill structure meets minimum standards for deployment
Pass Criteria (All must pass):
name in kebab-case formatdescription includes 3+ trigger keywords minimumProcess:
python3 review-multi/scripts/validate-structure.py <skill>Validation: PASS if structure score ≥4, FAIL if <4
Time: 5-10 minutes (automated)
Purpose: Ensure essential content sections and examples present
Pass Criteria (All must pass):
Process:
Validation: PASS if all 5 criteria met, FAIL if any missing
Time: 10-15 minutes (manual check)
Purpose: Ensure architecture pattern correctly implemented
Pass Criteria (Pattern-specific):
For Workflow Skills:
For Task Skills:
For Reference Skills:
Process:
Validation: PASS if pattern correctly implemented, FAIL if pattern violated
Time: 10-20 minutes (manual check)
Purpose: Comprehensive pass/fail check for deployment readiness
Pass Criteria (All must pass):
Process:
Validation: PASS if all criteria met (ready to deploy), FAIL if any critical issue
Time: 30-45 minutes (combines all operations)
Output: DEPLOY or HOLD decision
# Skill Validation Report: [Skill Name]
**Validation Date**: [Date]
**Validator**: [Name]
## Validation Results
Operation 1: Structure Validation
Status: ✅ PASS | ❌ FAIL
- YAML: [Pass/Fail]
- Files: [Pass/Fail]
- Naming: [Pass/Fail]
- Structure Score: [X]/5
Operation 2: Content Validation
Status: ✅ PASS | ❌ FAIL
- Overview: [Present/Missing]
- When to Use: [X scenarios - Pass if ≥3]
- Main Content: [Present/Missing]
- Examples: [X examples - Pass if ≥3]
- Guidance: [Present/Missing]
Operation 3: Pattern Validation
Status: ✅ PASS | ❌ FAIL
- Pattern: [Workflow/Task/Reference]
- Implementation: [Correct/Incorrect]
- Consistency: [Yes/No]
Operation 4: Production Readiness
Status: ✅ READY TO DEPLOY | ❌ HOLD
Critical Issues: [List if any]
## Deployment Decision
✅ DEPLOY - All validations passed, ready for production
OR
❌ HOLD - Critical issues must be fixed:
1. [Issue 1 with fix]
2. [Issue 2 with fix]
Practice: Run skill-validator on all skills before production deployment
Rationale: Catches critical issues, prevents shipping broken skills
Application: Make validation part of deployment checklist
Practice: Skills must pass validation to be deployed
Rationale: Maintains ecosystem quality baseline
Application: No exceptions - PASS required for deployment
Practice: Use review-multi automation for structure validation
Rationale: 95% automated, fast, consistent
Application: Run validate-structure.py as first check
Practice: When skill fails, specify exactly what to fix
Rationale: Actionable feedback enables quick fixes
Application: List specific issues with remediation steps
Practice: After fixing issues, run validation again to confirm
Rationale: Ensures fixes actually resolve issues
Application: Validate → Fix → Re-validate cycle
| Operation | Focus | Pass Criteria | Time | Automation | |-----------|-------|---------------|------|------------| | Structure | YAML, files, naming | Score ≥4 | 5-10m | 95% (use review-multi) | | Content | Sections, examples | 5 criteria all met | 10-15m | 40% | | Pattern | Architecture compliance | Pattern correct | 10-20m | 50% | | Production Readiness | Overall deployment decision | All validations pass | 30-45m | Combined |
Structure:
Content:
Pattern:
Production:
Run validation operations 1-4
↓
All PASS?
├─ Yes → ✅ DEPLOY (production ready)
└─ No → Which failed?
├─ Structure → Fix YAML/files (critical)
├─ Content → Add missing sections (critical)
├─ Pattern → Fix implementation (critical)
└─ After fixes → Re-validate → Deploy if pass
Use Both:
Workflow:
Build skill → skill-validator (PASS?) → review-multi (score?) →
Deploy (if PASS) + Note improvements (from review-multi)
skill-validator provides quality gating for skill deployment, ensuring minimum standards met before production release.
development
Setup secure web-based terminal access to WSL2 from mobile/tablet via ttyd + ngrok/Cloudflare/Tailscale. One-command install, start, stop, status. Use when you need remote terminal access, web terminal, browser-based shell, or mobile access to WSL2 environment.
development
Complete development workflows where Claude writes the code while Gemini and Codex provide research, planning, reviews, and different perspectives. Claude remains the main developer. Use for complex projects requiring expert planning and multi-perspective reviews.
development
Systematic progress tracking for skill development. Manages task states (pending/in_progress/completed), updates in real-time, reports progress, identifies blockers, and maintains momentum. Use when tracking skill development, coordinating work, or reporting progress.
testing
Comprehensive testing workflow orchestrating functional testing, example validation, integration testing, and usability assessment. Sequential workflow for complete skill testing from examples through scenarios to integration validation. Use when conducting thorough testing, pre-deployment validation, ensuring skill functionality, or comprehensive quality checks.