Skill Health Check

Trigger

• Keywords: skill health, skill audit, skill lint, check skills, skill quality, validate skills

When NOT to Use

• Code review (use /codex-review-fast)
• Document review (use /codex-review-doc)
• Creating new skills (use skill-creator plugin, external)
• .claude directory structure check (use /claude-health)

Core Principle

Skills are on-demand context packages. Their value comes from routing precision (right skill triggers at right time) and context efficiency (minimum tokens for maximum capability). A poorly routed skill wastes context on every mismatch; a well-routed skill transforms a generalist into a specialist at exactly the right moment.

Workflow

Run automated lint → Review manual dimensions → Produce integrated report → Gate

Step 1: Automated Lint

bash scripts/run-skill.sh skill-health-check skill-lint.js --fix-hint

Script I/O contract:

Parameter	Description
--skills-dir <path>	Skills directory (default: ./skills)
--commands-dir <path>	Commands directory (default: ./commands)
--json	Output JSON instead of markdown
--fix-hint	Include fix suggestions
Exit 0	All pass
Exit 1	Warnings only (P2)
Exit 2	Errors found (P0/P1)

Automated checks (9 items):

#	Check	Severity	Criteria
1	Frontmatter exists	P0	name + description required
2	Routing signature	P1	Description has at least 2 of 3 routing cues (Use/Avoid/Output); 0 cues = P1, 1 cue = P2
3	When NOT section	P1	Body has "When NOT to Use" heading
4	Output section	P2	Body defines expected deliverable
5	Verification section	P2	Body has verification checklist
6	References routing	P2	Each reference file mentioned in body
7	Scripts contract	P2	Each script filename referenced in SKILL.md body
8	Line count	P2	Warning >150, flag >250
9	Allowed-tools sync	P1	SKILL.md allowed-tools matches command allowed-tools (command is authoritative)

Cross-skill checks (3 items):

#	Check	Severity	Criteria
10	Orphan detection	P2	Commands ↔ Skills pairing
11	Description overlap	P2	Jaccard similarity >60% flagged
12	Argument hint	P2	Command with skill reference has argument-hint in frontmatter

Step 2: Manual Review (when comprehensive audit requested)

Read flagged skills and evaluate:

Dimension	Question	Rating
Why > What	Does skill explain underlying principles, not just steps?	⭐1-5
Scope fitness	Is the skill focused? Could it be split?	⭐1-5
Progressive loading	Is heavy content in references/, not inline?	⭐1-5
Routing precision	Would a user's request unambiguously trigger this skill?	⭐1-5

Only run Step 2 when user explicitly requests deep audit. Default: Step 1 only.

Output

# Skill Health Check Report

## Summary

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Skills scanned | N |
| Commands scanned | N |
| Checks passed | N |
| P0 (Must Fix) | N |
| P1 (Should Fix) | N |
| P2 (Suggestion) | N |

## Per-Skill Results

| Skill | Routing | When-NOT | Output | Verification | Refs | ArgHint | AT-Sync | Lines | Status |
|-------|---------|----------|--------|--------------|------|---------|---------|-------|--------|
| name  | ✅/🟡/⚪ | ...    | ...    | ...          | ...  | ✅/⚪/— | ✅/🟡   | N     | ✅/🟡/⚪/🔴 |

## P0 (Must Fix)
- **skill-name**: Issue → Fix recommendation

## P1 (Should Fix)
- **skill-name**: Issue → Fix recommendation

## P2 (Suggestion)
- **skill-name**: Issue → Fix recommendation

## Gate: ✅ All Pass / ⛔ N issues need fixing

Verification

• Automated lint executed (exit code checked)
• All P0/P1 findings have fix recommendations
• Per-skill table includes all scanned skills
• Gate sentinel present for hook parsing

References

• references/routing-signature-guide.md — How to write effective routing signatures (read when fixing P1 routing issues)

Examples

Input: /skill-health-check
Action: Run skill-lint.js → Output markdown report + Gate

Input: /skill-health-check --deep
Action: Run skill-lint.js → Manual review of flagged skills → Integrated report

Input: Are my skills well-designed?
Action: Trigger health check → Report + improvement suggestions