Create skill
Claude Code skills for on-demand engineering work — PR risk review, repo introspection, audits, ownership maps. Published at cdd.dev/skills/swe.
npx -y skills add ckorhonen/swe-skills --skill create-skillAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Creates or revises `swe:` skills for this repository using a repeatable authoring workflow: define concrete use cases, tune trigger boundaries, apply progressive disclosure, add matching eval assets, and validate the package. Use when adding a new skill, tightening an existing skill that over- or under-triggers, or distilling an external workflow into a repo-ready skill. Do NOT use for generic documentation edits or for executing the workflow the skill would describe.
SKILL.md
6.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
SWE Create Skill
What This Skill Does
Use this skill to author or revise a swe: skill package for this repository in
a way that is:
- grounded in concrete user workflows
- narrow enough to trigger reliably
- consistent with this repo's skill and eval conventions
- easy to validate and improve over time
This skill distills the Anthropic skill-building guidance into a repo-specific authoring workflow.
The outcome should usually include:
- one
skills/<slug>/SKILL.md - one matching
evals/<slug>/README.md - one matching
evals/<slug>/rubric.md - one matching
evals/<slug>/cases.json - any required updates to
README.mdorAGENTS.md
When To Use
Use this skill when the user wants to:
- add a new
swe:skill to this repository - revise an existing skill that is too broad, too narrow, or structurally weak
- turn an external guide or repeated workflow into a reusable repo-local skill
- standardize how future skill authors package instructions and evals
Do Not Use
Do not use this skill for:
- implementing the engineering workflow that the skill would later describe
- generic repo documentation cleanup with no skill-authoring goal
- one-off prompts that are not repeatable enough to justify a skill
- large repository policy rewrites unrelated to skill authoring
Inputs To Confirm
Confirm or infer:
- whether the work is a new skill or a revision to an existing one
- the target workflow, user outcome, and success criteria
- 2-3 realistic trigger phrases a user would actually say
- the important non-goals or negative triggers
- whether the skill depends on local tooling, MCP integrations, or external references
- whether matching eval assets already exist or must be created
If the request is underspecified, ask only for the missing workflow boundary needed to keep the skill narrow.
Instructions
Step 1: Start With Concrete Use Cases
Define 2-3 specific use cases before writing the skill.
For each use case, capture:
- user request
- workflow steps Claude should perform
- result the user should get
Only proceed if the workflow is repeatable and benefits from consistent instructions.
Step 2: Inspect Local Skill Conventions First
Read the repository's current guidance and analogous skills before drafting.
At minimum, inspect:
AGENTS.mdREADME.md- one or two nearby
skills/*/SKILL.mdexamples - the matching
evals/*assets for those examples
Honor these repo-specific rules:
- skill frontmatter
namemust start withswe: - skill folder names stay kebab-case without the
swe:prefix - every skill needs a matching
evals/<slug>/directory README.mdmust stay accurate when the skill inventory changes
Step 3: Define The Trigger Boundary
Write the trigger boundary before drafting the full body.
The frontmatter description should state:
- what the skill does
- when to use it
- a few realistic trigger phrases
- at least one clear non-goal when over-triggering is plausible
Prefer specific requests over vague categories. A skill that says
help with engineering is not acceptable.
Step 4: Design For Progressive Disclosure
Keep the skill package layered:
- frontmatter should be concise and triggerable
SKILL.mdshould hold the full workflow- only add
scripts/,references/, orassets/when they materially improve execution or keep the main skill readable
Do not inline large reference material if a short summary plus targeted lookup is enough.
Step 5: Draft The Skill Body
Draft the SKILL.md body using this repository's required structure:
## What This Skill Does## When To Use## Do Not Use## Inputs To Confirm## Instructions## Output Requirements## Quality Bar
Make the instructions operational:
- sequence the workflow clearly
- name evidence sources or required artifacts
- specify hard constraints when needed
- keep output shape reviewable
- prefer concrete language over broad advice
Add optional sections only when they help, such as:
## Tooling Stance## Parallelization Rule## Examples## Troubleshooting
Step 6: Draft Matching Eval Assets
Create or update:
evals/<slug>/README.mdevals/<slug>/rubric.mdevals/<slug>/cases.json
The eval set should test the real contract of the skill, not generic prose quality.
Include cases that cover a mix of:
- a clear happy path
- a bounded-scope or report-only variant
- an edge case involving missing evidence, missing tooling, or conflicting scope
Prefer review questions that make the reviewer inspect whether the response stayed within the workflow boundary.
Step 7: Validate And Tune
After drafting, run the repo validators and use any failures to refine the package:
npm run evals:checknpm run lint:md
If the skill still seems likely to over-trigger or under-trigger, tighten the frontmatter description before expanding the body.
Step 8: Update Repo Guidance Narrowly
If the new skill changes the public inventory or authoring workflow, update the narrowest correct guidance files, usually:
README.mdAGENTS.md
Do not broaden unrelated policy text.
Output Requirements
When creating or revising a skill, provide:
- the skill slug and frontmatter
name - the workflow boundary in one short paragraph
- the files created or updated
- the key trigger phrases and non-goals
- the validation commands run and their outcomes
- any remaining risks, such as likely over-triggering or missing ecosystem examples
If the request is draft-only, return a review packet instead of writing files.
Quality Bar
- Start from concrete use cases, not abstract capability names.
- Keep the workflow narrow enough that it triggers reliably.
- Follow repo conventions exactly for naming, sections, and eval layout.
- Use progressive disclosure instead of bloating
SKILL.md. - Include explicit non-goals when the scope could blur.
- Make the eval cases test the skill's actual contract.
- Update repo guidance only where the new skill changes documented behavior.