rem-page-skill · git:20261002.5fd03f8 · 2026-10-02 · sha256 44f83de57d80bbf2
rem-page-skill git:20261002.5fd03f8A
Immutable. This exact content never changes and is served at /api/v1/blob/44f83de57d80bbf2.
--- name: rem-page-skill description: A skill page for judging usefulness, observed reliability and how to start, grounded in run evidence. --- # An installed skill's page Why these rules: docs/rem-skills/rem-page-skill.md Help a reader choose a task, judge reliability and start. Keep the opening short and plain. Link the source near the end; do not paste its instructions. State missing execution evidence once in `Current status`; do not repeat it in every section. Omit optional sections that would only restate that gap. Keep the core headings `What it does`, `Insight`, `When to use`, `Current status`, `How to use`, `Inputs and outputs`, `Usage history`, `Limitations`, `Uncertainties`, `Source` and `Sources`. Keep other headings only when evidence fills them; omit an optional section whose whole body would be Unknown. Keep the order below: ```markdown # <Name> ## What it does ## Insight ## When to use ## Current status ## Example result ## How to use ## Inputs and outputs ## Usage history ## Performance ## Limitations ## Maintenance ## Related projects ## Open threads ## Uncertainties ## Source ## Sources ``` **The short opening** - `Insight`: 1–3 cited findings changing task choice, setup or verification. Compare instructions with recorded outputs; name the mismatch, capability or failure condition, consequence and next check. Prefer a specific trap or conflicting rule over listing prerequisites. Put the execution-evidence caveat in `Current status`, not in each Insight. Counts do not prove success. - `What it does`: one plain sentence: the task and useful outcome. Metadata is advertised capability, not verified behaviour. - `When to use`: a concrete suitable task and an important unsuitable case, when known. Never present invented examples as observed successes. - `Current status`: latest observed run date, version/model, whether the task was completed, actual output, quality assessment, known blockers; a few lines linking the detailed run. With no reviewed run evidence: `Unknown — not verified` (not "never ran"). - `Example result`: one real artifact or short excerpt with its run reference. Label illustrative examples and failed/partial outputs. - `How to use`: shortest verified invocation, prerequisites, working directory, ideally at most three steps. Never expose credentials. - `Inputs and outputs`: required inputs, expected outputs and their locations. **Run evidence and statistics** `Usage history`: observed runs, recent first: date, task, run ID/link, skill version or source hash, model/configuration, completion, output/artifact, quality assessment, elapsed time, failure reason. Missing fields stay Unknown. Exit status, task completion and quality are three separate things: a clean exit without the artifact is not completion; an unreviewed output is not good. Link older records when numerous. `Performance` summarizes observed records, never advertising: - Date range, sources, coverage gaps, number of distinct runs (deduplicated by run identity). No records means unknown, not 0% or zero runs. - Completed, partial, failed, cancelled, unknown counts. A completion rate states numerator, denominator and exclusions; never hide failures or compare a truncated retry with a completed task. - Quality separately, with a named rubric or review basis and number reviewed. No invented numeric score; unreviewed outputs do not pass. - Elapsed time and input/output tokens with units and per-metric sample sizes; per-run totals apart from per-call usage. Never infer tokens/second from task duration; use generation timing. Never invent cost or token telemetry. - Separate skill versions, models/context settings and comparable task types or difficulty; label cache conditions if relevant; never pool unlike runs. Small samples are observations, not guarantees. **Limits and maintenance** - `Limitations`: scope, dependencies, known failure patterns and workarounds, each evidenced. - `Maintenance`: verified maintainer/contact, recent dated changes and whether they were validated. Earlier successes do not verify a newer version. - `Related projects`: observed associations and valid links only. - Notebook links use notebook paths. Do not copy source-relative `../name/SKILL.md` links into the catalog; use a verified catalog link or the plain skill name. - `Open threads`: concrete next actions, owners/dates when known. - `Uncertainties`: missing logs, unread sources, stale results, unresolved identity/version attribution. Do not manufacture a complete-looking dashboard. - `Source`: the map owns it: the source file (linked, never pasted), discovery location, allowed tools and every installed copy, identical or differing by content hash. Leave it as the map wrote it. - `Sources`: numbered references with source id, date, confidence; every investigated claim cited. Mark inference. **Mapping and later review** Mapping owns installed copies and session counts. Review adds evidence and preserves those markers, identity, useful prior content and `Investigation:`. Never execute a skill merely to document it. Catalog pages go in `skills/catalog/`. Review source and retained eval summaries; never read mail or execute the skill for this review. Only explicit slash-command records are matched; attribution to an installed version and goal achievement stay unverified without artifact evidence.