home / skills / everyinc / compound-engineering-plugin / create-agent-skills

This skill helps you verify Claude Code Skill content accuracy by auditing SKILL.md and references, ensuring claims stay current.

npx playbooks add skill everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin --skill create-agent-skills

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (26)
SKILL.md
8.5 KB
# Workflow: Verify Skill Content Accuracy

<required_reading>
**Read these reference files NOW:**
1. references/skill-structure.md
</required_reading>

<purpose>
Audit checks structure. **Verify checks truth.**

Skills contain claims about external things: APIs, CLI tools, frameworks, services. These change over time. This workflow checks if a skill's content is still accurate.
</purpose>

<process>
## Step 1: Select the Skill

```bash
ls ~/.claude/skills/
```

Present numbered list, ask: "Which skill should I verify for accuracy?"

## Step 2: Read and Categorize

Read the entire skill (SKILL.md + workflows/ + references/):
```bash
cat ~/.claude/skills/{skill-name}/SKILL.md
cat ~/.claude/skills/{skill-name}/workflows/*.md 2>/dev/null
cat ~/.claude/skills/{skill-name}/references/*.md 2>/dev/null
```

Categorize by primary dependency type:

| Type | Examples | Verification Method |
|------|----------|---------------------|
| **API/Service** | manage-stripe, manage-gohighlevel | Context7 + WebSearch |
| **CLI Tools** | build-macos-apps (xcodebuild, swift) | Run commands |
| **Framework** | build-iphone-apps (SwiftUI, UIKit) | Context7 for docs |
| **Integration** | setup-stripe-payments | WebFetch + Context7 |
| **Pure Process** | create-agent-skills | No external deps |

Report: "This skill is primarily [type]-based. I'll verify using [method]."

## Step 3: Extract Verifiable Claims

Scan skill content and extract:

**CLI Tools mentioned:**
- Tool names (xcodebuild, swift, npm, etc.)
- Specific flags/options documented
- Expected output patterns

**API Endpoints:**
- Service names (Stripe, Meta, etc.)
- Specific endpoints documented
- Authentication methods
- SDK versions

**Framework Patterns:**
- Framework names (SwiftUI, React, etc.)
- Specific APIs/patterns documented
- Version-specific features

**File Paths/Structures:**
- Expected project structures
- Config file locations

Present: "Found X verifiable claims to check."

## Step 4: Verify by Type

### For CLI Tools
```bash
# Check tool exists
which {tool-name}

# Check version
{tool-name} --version

# Verify documented flags work
{tool-name} --help | grep "{documented-flag}"
```

### For API/Service Skills
Use Context7 to fetch current documentation:
```
mcp__context7__resolve-library-id: {service-name}
mcp__context7__get-library-docs: {library-id}, topic: {relevant-topic}
```

Compare skill's documented patterns against current docs:
- Are endpoints still valid?
- Has authentication changed?
- Are there deprecated methods being used?

### For Framework Skills
Use Context7:
```
mcp__context7__resolve-library-id: {framework-name}
mcp__context7__get-library-docs: {library-id}, topic: {specific-api}
```

Check:
- Are documented APIs still current?
- Have patterns changed?
- Are there newer recommended approaches?

### For Integration Skills
WebSearch for recent changes:
```
"[service name] API changes 2026"
"[service name] breaking changes"
"[service name] deprecated endpoints"
```

Then Context7 for current SDK patterns.

### For Services with Status Pages
WebFetch official docs/changelog if available.

## Step 5: Generate Freshness Report

Present findings:

```
## Verification Report: {skill-name}

### ✅ Verified Current
- [Claim]: [Evidence it's still accurate]

### ⚠️ May Be Outdated
- [Claim]: [What changed / newer info found]
  → Current: [what docs now say]

### ❌ Broken / Invalid
- [Claim]: [Why it's wrong]
  → Fix: [What it should be]

### ℹ️ Could Not Verify
- [Claim]: [Why verification wasn't possible]

---
**Overall Status:** [Fresh / Needs Updates / Significantly Stale]
**Last Verified:** [Today's date]
```

## Step 6: Offer Updates

If issues found:

"Found [N] items that need updating. Would you like me to:"

1. **Update all** - Apply all corrections
2. **Review each** - Show each change before applying
3. **Just the report** - No changes

If updating:
- Make changes based on verified current information
- Add verification date comment if appropriate
- Report what was updated

## Step 7: Suggest Verification Schedule

Based on skill type, recommend:

| Skill Type | Recommended Frequency |
|------------|----------------------|
| API/Service | Every 1-2 months |
| Framework | Every 3-6 months |
| CLI Tools | Every 6 months |
| Pure Process | Annually |

"This skill should be re-verified in approximately [timeframe]."
</process>

<verification_shortcuts>
## Quick Verification Commands

**Check if CLI tool exists and get version:**
```bash
which {tool} && {tool} --version
```

**Context7 pattern for any library:**
```
1. resolve-library-id: "{library-name}"
2. get-library-docs: "{id}", topic: "{specific-feature}"
```

**WebSearch patterns:**
- Breaking changes: "{service} breaking changes 2026"
- Deprecations: "{service} deprecated API"
- Current best practices: "{framework} best practices 2026"
</verification_shortcuts>

<success_criteria>
Verification is complete when:
- [ ] Skill categorized by dependency type
- [ ] Verifiable claims extracted
- [ ] Each claim checked with appropriate method
- [ ] Freshness report generated
- [ ] Updates applied (if requested)
- [ ] User knows when to re-verify
</success_criteria>

Overview

This skill provides expert guidance for creating, writing, and refining Claude Code Skills, focused on structure, accuracy, and maintainability. It helps authors audit skill content, extract verifiable claims, and produce a clear verification report with suggested updates and schedules. Use it to ensure skills remain accurate as external tools and services evolve.

How this skill works

The workflow walks an auditor through selecting a skill, reading all skill files, categorizing the skill by dependency type, and extracting verifiable claims (CLI flags, API endpoints, framework patterns, file paths). It then verifies claims using the appropriate methods (local commands for CLI, Context7 for libraries/frameworks, web searches for integrations) and generates a freshness report with recommended fixes and a re-verification cadence.

When to use it

  • Before publishing a new skill to ensure claims are accurate and sources cited
  • When updating an existing skill after tool, API, or framework releases
  • As part of a periodic maintenance cadence to prevent stale instructions
  • When triaging user bug reports that might stem from outdated external dependencies
  • During code review to confirm documented commands and file paths match reality

Best practices

  • Always read the full SKILL.md, workflows/, and references/ before verifying
  • Categorize the skill by its primary dependency to choose the right verification method
  • Extract concrete, testable claims (tool names, flags, endpoints, paths) for verification
  • Use local checks for CLI tools and Context7/web searches for APIs and frameworks
  • Include a verification date and recommended re-check interval in the report

Example use cases

  • Audit a skill that documents a third-party API to detect deprecated endpoints or auth changes
  • Verify CLI commands and flags in a build-oriented skill by running version and help checks
  • Check framework-specific code patterns against the latest library docs via Context7
  • Produce a step-by-step freshness report for maintainers after a major service release
  • Automate periodic verification reminders based on the suggested cadence

FAQ

How many verifiable claims should I extract?

Extract every concrete claim that could become incorrect: tool names and flags, endpoints and auth methods, framework APIs, and file path expectations. Report the total count so reviewers know scope.

What if Context7 or websearch returns ambiguous results?

Flag those claims as 'Could Not Verify' in the report, note the ambiguity, and recommend manual confirmation or contacting the service owner.