ln-61-skill-reviewer

Reviews standalone skills and their distribution surfaces for publication readiness.

556|83|Updated Oct 24, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-61-skill-reviewer
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: ln-61-skill-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/tree/main/plugins/maintainer-suite/skills/ln-61-skill-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-61-skill-reviewer

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Publishing an AI skill without a rigorous review risks broken installation, wrong triggering, unsafe behavior, or invalid contracts reaching users. This Skill provides a structured, evidence-based review process that validates skill structure, frontmatter, host catalog integration, and real behavioral activation before release.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Structural Validation: Checks frontmatter naming, description quality, canonical layout, and repository-defined contracts against each configured host catalog.
  • Behavioral Review: Derives positive and close-negative prompts, walks normal and failure scenarios, and uses fresh independent contexts to verify activation boundaries.
  • Evidence-Based Verdicts: Tracks every checklist item as PROVEN, CLEARED, or UNPROVEN and issues a PASS, PASS WITH CONCERNS, FAIL, or BLOCKED verdict with cited findings.
  • Use Case: Before publishing a new skill to a Claude Code or Codex marketplace, run this review to confirm the skill triggers correctly, stays standalone, and passes all host-native validators.

Quick Start

Review the skill in plugins/my-suite/skills/my-skill for publication readiness and report a verdict with evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions about ln-61-skill-reviewer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review a Claude Code skill before publishing it?

Run a structured review that validates frontmatter naming and description quality, checks the canonical skill layout, runs repository and host-native validators, and tests behavioral activation with positive and close-negative prompts. The review ends with a PASS, PASS WITH CONCERNS, FAIL, or BLOCKED verdict.

What makes a skill description pass review?

A passing description states the capability, a positive trigger, and an important near-negative boundary while staying within the host's length limit. It must avoid claims broader than what the workflow actually supports.

Does this review modify the repository or publish anything?

No. The review is strictly read-only: it does not edit files, stage changes, publish packages, update marketplaces, or create GitHub state. Any diagnostic artifact must be temporary and disclosed in the residual-risk section.

What happens when a required validator tool is unavailable?

Tool absence is not itself a defect. The review falls back to manual YAML, naming, path, and catalog checks, and only returns BLOCKED when the missing capability prevents a reliable verdict.

When should a skill review return a FAIL verdict?

FAIL applies when a confirmed defect can cause wrong triggering, unsafe behavior, broken installation, or an invalid contract. Critical failures must be reproduced before assigning a blocking severity.