Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Audit Skill() refs; detect hubs, isolates, and dangling targets. Use when auditing skills.
.claude/skills/athola-skill-graph-audit/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -11% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -12% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -44% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -19% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 47% | 0% |
Build a directed graph of Skill(plugin:name) invocations across the marketplace and surface composition patterns: which skills are heavily referenced (hubs), which orchestrate many others (orchestrators), which have no incoming or outgoing references (isolates), and which point at non-existent skills (dangling references).
The federation graph is now derivable from source rather than hand-curated.
Skill() referencesSkill(abstract:skills-eval) insteadSkill(abstract:plugin-review)Skill(abstract:hooks-eval)bashpython3 plugins/abstract/scripts/skill_graph.py \ --plugins-root plugins --top-n 10
For machine-readable output:
bashpython3 plugins/abstract/scripts/skill_graph.py \ --plugins-root plugins --format json --output reports/skill-graph.json
See modules/usage.md for full CLI reference and example workflows.
| Output | Meaning | Action when high | |--------|---------|------------------| | Hubs | Most-referenced skills | Treat as core API; retire with extreme care | | Orchestrators | Skills that call many others | Verify each ref still resolves | | Isolates | Zero in / zero out | Check role: library? entrypoint? typo? | | Dangling: bugs | Missing internal target | Fix immediately (typo or retired skill) | | Dangling: external | Reference to external plugin | Document plugin dependency | | Dangling: placeholders | Template text like -NAME | Verify intentional |
See modules/interpretation.md for false-positive guidance and isolation taxonomy.
This skill itself was scaffolded TDD-first; on first run against plugins/, it caught two genuine dangling refs that the manual audit (2026-04-25) had missed:
attune:makefile-generation -> abstract:makefile-dogfooder(script name confused with skill name)
imbue:karpathy-principles -> spec-kit:speckit-clarify(command referenced as skill)
Both were converted to correct command-style references in the same session.
Two ways to validate the audit output is trustworthy:
plugins/abstract/tests/scripts/test_skill_graph.py to confirm extraction, graph construction, ranking, isolate detection, and dangling-ref classification all pass on the current code. The -o addopts= flag bypasses the package-wide coverage gate, which would otherwise fail on a single-file run.
baseline run, fix one or more flagged references, then rerun and verify the count drops by at least the number fixed. If the count does not move, the report is stale or the regex missed a syntax variant.
skill_graph.py runs against plugins/without error and emits a node/edge count.
placeholders (the three Core Outputs rows resolve).
Dangling: bugs entry is either fixed in the samesession or filed as a tracked issue.
pytest -o addopts= plugins/abstract/tests/scripts/test_skill_graph.pypasses.
by at least the number of references fixed.
Skill(abstract:skills-eval): per-skill quality scoringSkill(abstract:plugin-review): plugin manifest and structureSkill(abstract:hooks-eval): hook-specific validationSkill(abstract:rules-eval): rules directory validationplugins/abstract/scripts/skill_graph.pyplugins/abstract/tests/scripts/test_skill_graph.pydocs/quality-gates.md#skill-level-quality-gate-composition
docs/skill-integration-guide.md#skill-role-taxonomy| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 23,360 | 6,503 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,866 | 1,461 | -62% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 4,437 | 7,955 | +79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 607 | 1,545 | +155% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 16,585 | 6,861 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,632 | 1,458 | -45% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 11,839 | 3,273 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,863 | 1,666 | -11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 13,520 | 7,040 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,549 | 2,251 | -12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 15,834 | 2,052 | -87% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,409 | 1,353 | -44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 12,842 | 3,102 | -76% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,029 | 1,649 | -19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 5,976 | 1,808 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 958 | 1,409 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 7,855 | 3,286 | -58% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,292 | 1,623 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 10,185 | 5,700 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,497 | 2,039 | +36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 11,518 | 6,363 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,865 | 2,216 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 10,903 | 3,934 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,754 | 1,706 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 9,239 | 5,968 | -35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,435 | 1,946 | +36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 14,351 | 9,749 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,133 | 2,660 | +25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 8,730 | 2,459 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,254 | 1,426 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 11,637 | 6,252 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,696 | 1,982 | +17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 7,030 | 5,951 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 970 | 2,077 | +114% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 4,883 | 2,578 | -47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 723 | 1,477 | +104% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 7,210 | 3,062 | -58% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,086 | 1,606 | +48% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 10,465 | 7,814 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,698 | 2,341 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 7,478 | 5,730 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,311 | 1,960 | +50% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 8,786 | 2,255 | -74% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,298 | 1,410 | +9% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | fail→pass | 7,321 | 1,867 | -74% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,091 | 1,285 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | fail→pass | 12,064 | 3,971 | -67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,773 | 1,763 | -1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-25 | fail→pass | 9,068 | 2,831 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,425 | 1,581 | +11% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 25 cases were attempted, and 22 counted toward the lift figure. The other 3 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +56 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.