Gold standard
Nine quality-canary skills for AI coding agents - code health, world-class rule completeness, grounding, supply chain, resilience, drift & more - plus the auto-cadence hooks that run them unprompted at session start and session end. Cross-agent, consent-gated, token-lean.
npx -y skills add HetCreep/CoalMine --skill gold-standardAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 11 stars11 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
World-class completeness audit — score a project's rules/standards/features against best-in-class exemplars, name the gaps, fill missing rules, adopt as binding, then offer to conform existing code. Triggers on keywords: "/gold-standard", "gold-standard", "audit rules", "are we world-class", "fill gaps", "complete our rules", "conform old code".
SKILL.md
9.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Gold Standard
Language: Generate EVERYTHING at runtime in the user's language — questions, answer options, menu labels, recommendations, report narrative. Detect from their messages; never default to English just because this file is English. English is allowed only for technical terms: commands, paths, code identifiers, severity labels (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), and tier names (Light/Standard/Heavy).
Answer: "For a project that does THIS — are rules/standards/features 100% vs world-class? If not, what's missing?"
Four acts: AUDIT → FILL → ADOPT → CONFORM. Stop at any.
Manual /gold-standard = interactive setup: read references/wizard.md (dual-audience — layman 1-question default · programmer order→bill→pay). The auto/keyword path (the Triggers table) skips it.
Triggers
| Keyword | Act |
|---|---|
| "audit rules" / "gold-standard" / "are we world-class" | AUDIT |
| "fill gaps" / "complete our rules" | FILL |
| "work by these rules" / "follow from now on" | ADOPT |
| "conform old code" / "retrofit" | CONFORM |
"fill and adopt" / ACTION=fill-adopt | AUDIT → FILL → summary → ADOPT → offer CONFORM |
Acts
ADOPT and every CONFORM fix are gated through ask_question — never assume approval.
- AUDIT — pick 3–5 named exemplars fresh at run time (the bar moves with the era — never reuse a remembered bar), derive the 100% checklist per dimension, score (✅/🟡/❌/N-A), give overall %. Previously filled/adopted rules are audit subjects too: a rule past its
revalidatedue date or contradicted by today's exemplars is a gap. - FILL — write missing MUST-HAVE rules into the project's rules home (
.claude/rules/→AGENTS.md→STANDARDS.md). Match project style + voice. Cite the exemplar. Invoke source-grounding for version-sensitive claims. Extend existing; never duplicate. Check the retired-rules record first — never resurrect a rule retired with a reason unless the user overrides. No overkill rules — only essential, practical, saturated ones. Stamp each rule:<!-- coalmine: verified <YYYY-MM-DD> · exemplar <name> · revalidate <30|90>d -->— 30d for fast-moving surfaces (agent platforms, model/API versions), 90d for general engineering. CVE/advisory rules re-validate on the advisory EVENT first; their 30d stamp is only the staleness backstop. Event override beats the calendar. (Rationale:references/method.md.) - ADOPT — treat the completed ruleset as binding for the rest of the session. Code changes still need user approval — adoption governs how to work, not license to auto-edit.
- CONFORM — scan existing code against adopted rules; report violations (
path:line· rule · evidence). Fix on approval: checkpoint → one fix → build+tests → revert if newly red. Style Drift: conform minority patterns to the dominant style (highest average usage); never start a standalone style refactor. - RE-VALIDATE (runs inside every repeat AUDIT, or when offered on a past-due stamp) — verdict each CoalMine-stamped rule, all changes choice-gated:
- still valid → re-stamp the date, touch nothing else (no churn);
- stale but needed → rewrite against today's exemplar;
- obsolete (subject removed, platform died, or substance merged into another rule) → delete the rule + record a one-line tombstone in the project's memory/decision log (
retired <rule> <date>: <reason>) — dead rules burn context every session; the tombstone blocks the next FILL from resurrecting them. - CONSISTENCY (the agent trusts memory/rules it never verifies — so verify them): scan the memory/decision log and any in-repo rule register for (a) a prescribed fix/"decision" that contradicts a binding rule or another decision (e.g. prescribing randomness where a determinism rule forbids it) — a poisoned/stale entry; (b) references to a file, flag, or command that no longer exists. Flag each with the conflicting source quoted; correct only through the choice-gate. This is the semantic half; the mechanical half (
node scripts/consistency.mjs: cross-document counts, byte-identical doctrine mirrors, well-formed stamps) runs without an agent.
Exemplar-picking rules, scorecard mechanics, stamp/tombstone formats: read references/method.md before the first AUDIT.
Method
- Bar — name 3–5 world-class exemplars + why them (cite real programs, not "best practices").
- Checklist — MUST-HAVE (table-stakes) vs EXCELLENCE (top-tier polish). Each tied to an exemplar.
- Score — every criterion. 🟡 = half credit. N-A must be justified; unjustified N-A = ❌.
- Gaps — prioritized: MUST-HAVEs first. Each: criterion · exemplar · effort · impact.
Dimensions (pick relevant)
Correctness · Security · Performance · UX/DX · Docs/onboarding · Testing/CI · Distribution/integrity · Observability · Governance/licensing · Maintainability · Compatibility · Error handling
Discipline
- Don't inflate. 85% should say 85%.
- Every criterion cites a real exemplar — "npm does X", "Cargo does Y". No unsourced "best practice".
- State dimensions not assessed + why.
- Blocked lookups: if sandbox/network blocks an external check, mark it N-A with justification — never guess.
- Multi-source grounding: never score from memory or a single source — cross-reference exemplars, registries, advisory feeds (GHSA/OSV/NVD).
Output
- Bar — category + named exemplars
- Scorecard —
| dimension | criterion | tier (must/excellence) | exemplar | status | evidence | - Per-dimension % + overall % (list N-A exclusions)
- Gaps — criterion · exemplar · effort · impact
- Verdict — 1 line + top 3 moves
Escalation — Scope & Model Quality
Tiers are capability targets, not platform commands — resolve each to your host's nearest lever. No lever for one? Degrade gracefully — never fake parallelism you can't do; escalate via model tier + reasoning depth instead.
| Level | Intent | Capability target | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Light | Quick gap check, AUDIT only | Cheapest model · single agent, no sub-agents. | Low |
| Standard | Balanced audit, AUDIT+FILL | Balanced model · raised reasoning · sub-agents per category only if your platform runs concurrent workers (else single-agent). | Balanced |
| Heavy | Full audit cycle, AUDIT+FILL+ADOPT+CONFORM | Most capable model + largest context · deepest reasoning · max sub-agent fan-out if supported · adversarial cross-check where available. | High |
Per-platform Heavy levers + Heavy-run durability: read references/escalation.md before a Heavy run. No concurrent fan-out on your host → escalate by model + reasoning only.
Agent Context (interactive): score the tier rubric, then call ask_question once with the 3 tiers — the pick marked ✓, score shown, labels localized — and wait for the choice before starting. ask_question = your platform's question tool: Claude Code AskUserQuestion · Cline ask_question · Copilot askQuestions · Gemini CLI ask_user (business-tier product; individual tiers ended 2026-06-18 → Antigravity CLI) · Codex request_user_input · Cursor/Devin Desktop (ex-Windsurf)/Antigravity built-in prompts; none → numbered text menu.
Tier rubric (deterministic): +1 each — ① >20 files or whole-repo/cross-module reach ② >2 of this skill's categories relevant ③ release/security/pre-ship context ④ findings will drive code changes. 0–1 Light · 2–3 Standard · 4 Heavy. Freshness cap: scope already audited ≥Standard this session → cap at Light (re-auditing fresh ground wastes tokens; scope to what changed). Default tier: honor .coalmine.json defaultTier unless the user requests a tier for that run — an explicit request overrides everything.
Hook Context (auto-triggered): auto-Light, no tier question, no sub-agents — report first. Interactive session (a user is present) → offer the fix menu after the report; non-interactive → report-only. Never fix without a chosen option.
Entanglement: after the report, if confirmed findings fall in another canary's domain, offer it once via ask_question (one line, max one offer): perf/N+1 → scale-canary · contract/serialization/config → drift-canary · failure-path/retry → resilience-audit · logging/metrics → telemetry-canary · coupling/DI → testability-canary · dependency/CVE → supply-chain-audit · unverified version-sensitive claim → source-grounding · missing/stale rule → gold-standard.
Self error-report: if this skill misbehaves (contradictory instruction, broken procedure, wrong finding class), OFFER to file it at https://github.com/HetCreep/CoalMine/issues/new/choose with a user-reviewed summary — never auto-submit, never include unapproved code or paths.