Skill Master helps you to find, invoke and improve LLM Agent skills automatically. It is also a skill itself
SaferSkills independently audited skill-master (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
An intelligent orchestrator that automates the entire skill lifecycle: discovery, creation, execution, and improvement.
When invoked with a task, this skill:
When invoked with feedback about a previous output:
Goal: Find an existing skill that can handle the user's task.
#### Step 1.1: Parse the Request
Identify from the user's request:
#### Step 1.2: Search for Skills
MUST follow the complete search workflow in [references/skill-search.md](references/skill-search.md).
Copy and track overall search progress:
Search Phase Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Internal skills searched
- [ ] Step 2.1: ALL known GitHub repos searched (anthropics, K-Dense-AI, ComposioHQ)
- [ ] Step 2.2: Known repos enumerated (if 2.1 had no matches)
- [ ] Step 2.3: Broader GitHub search (only after 2.1+2.2 exhausted)
- [ ] Step 3: Web search (only after GitHub exhausted)CRITICAL: MUST complete ALL searches in each step before proceeding to next step.
Search order - execute in sequence:
~/.claude/skills/ and .claude/skills/site:github.com/anthropics/skills SKILL.md <keywords>site:github.com/K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-skills SKILL.md <keywords>site:github.com/ComposioHQ/awesome-claude-skills SKILL.md <keywords>See references/known-skill-repos.md for curated skill sources.
#### Step 1.3: Evaluate Results
Validation gate before concluding search:
If skill found:
If NO skill found (only after ALL searches complete):
Goal: Determine where to store the skill.
Ask user using AskUserQuestion:
Where should this skill be stored?
1. LOCAL (.claude/skills/)
- Project-specific
- Shared with team via git
2. GLOBAL (~/.claude/skills/)
- Personal
- Available across all projectsRemember the choice for later use.
#### Step 2.1: Source Tracking (External Skills Only)
CRITICAL: When storing a skill found from an external source (GitHub, web), you MUST create a source.md file alongside the SKILL.md to track provenance.
Create source.md in the skill directory with:
# Source
- **Origin**: <GitHub | Web | MCP Marketplace>
- **URL**: <original URL where skill was found>
- **Repository**: <owner/repo if GitHub>
- **Author**: <original author if known>
- **Retrieved**: <date skill was fetched>
- **License**: <license if specified>
## Notes
<Any relevant notes about the source, modifications made, etc.>Do NOT create source.md for:
Goal: Create a new skill through deep research.
Follow the creation workflow in references/skill-create.md.
Steps:
Goal: Invoke the skill to complete the user's original task.
CRITICAL: You MUST invoke the found/created skill using the Skill tool. Do NOT manually follow the instructions - the skill must be triggered as an independent execution.
#### Step 4.1: Invoke the Skill
Use the Skill tool to trigger the skill:
Skill: <skill-name>
args: <user's original request>Example:
Skill: market-research-reports
args: "Create a market analysis for electric vehicles in Europe"The Skill tool will:
#### Step 4.2: Capture Execution Memory
After the skill completes, the conversation now contains "execution memory" - the full record of what happened during skill execution. This memory is used in Phase 5 for review.
#### Step 4.3: Verify Completion
Confirm the skill delivered the expected output to the user.
Goal: Determine if the skill needs improvement based on actual execution.
CRITICAL: This must happen in a fresh agent context using Task tool.
#### Step 5.1: Spawn Fresh Agent
Use Task tool to create a fresh agent for review:
Task: "Review skill execution for improvements"
You are reviewing a skill execution. You have:
1. The SKILL.md content (provided below)
2. The conversation memory of what actually happened (this conversation)
Your job: Compare what the skill SAYS vs what ACTUALLY HAPPENED.
## The Skill
<paste SKILL.md content here>
## Review Questions
1. Did I have to deviate from the skill's instructions? Where?
2. Did I have to improvise something not in the skill? What?
3. Did the user have to clarify something the skill should have covered?
4. Were there errors/retries that better instructions could prevent?
## Output
If NO divergence: "Skill executed perfectly. No improvements needed."
If divergence found: List specific improvements with format:
- Location: <which part of skill>
- Issue: <what happened during execution>
- Suggestion: <concrete change to make>#### Step 5.2: Handle Review Results
If no improvements needed:
If improvements suggested:
#### Step 5.3: Apply Improvements
Follow the improvement workflow in references/skill-improve.md.
For local/personal skills: Apply changes directly using Edit tool.
For official/external skills:
Report final status:
## Task Complete
- **Task**: <original request>
- **Skill Used**: <skill name>
- **Skill Location**: <path>
- **Improvements Applied**: Yes / No / N/A
<Any relevant notes>Trigger: User explicitly invokes skill-master with feedback about a previous output.
Examples:
/skill-master please fix the report, the analysis is too shallowInvoke skill-master to adjust the documentation and add more examples#### Step 7.1: Fix the Output First
Address the user's immediate request:
#### Step 7.2: Check for State Tracking
Look for .skill-master-state.json in the working directory:
Read: .skill-master-state.jsonIf state file exists and matches the output:
If no state file or no match:
#### Step 7.3: Link Feedback to Skill
From state file, identify:
skill_name: Which skill produced this outputskill_path: Where the skill is storedoutputs: Verify the file user mentioned is in the outputs list#### Step 7.4: Trigger Review with Feedback Context
Use Task tool to spawn fresh agent for review:
Task: "Review skill based on user feedback"
The user requested changes to output produced by this skill.
This feedback indicates the skill needs improvement.
## The Skill
<paste SKILL.md content>
## User Feedback
<user's feedback request>
## Changes Made
<what was changed to fix the output>
## Your Task
Determine how to improve the skill so future executions
produce better output without needing these adjustments.
## Output
List specific improvements:
- WHERE: <which part of skill>
- ISSUE: <what was missing/wrong>
- SUGGESTION: <concrete change>#### Step 7.5: Apply Improvements
Follow references/skill-improve.md to apply the suggested improvements.
Report:
## Feedback Processed
- **Output Fixed**: Yes
- **Linked Skill**: <skill name>
- **Skill Improved**: Yes / No (if external)
- **Changes**: <summary of skill improvements>Track workflow state by writing to .skill-master-state.json:
{
"request": "original user request",
"state": "SEARCH | CREATE | EXECUTE | REVIEW | COMPLETE | FEEDBACK",
"skill_found": true/false,
"skill_name": "name",
"skill_path": "path",
"skill_source": {
"origin": "internal | github | web | created",
"url": "original URL if external",
"retrieved": "date"
},
"storage_location": "local | global",
"outputs": ["path/to/output1.md", "path/to/output2.pdf"],
"improvements_needed": true/false,
"improvements_applied": true/false
}Update this file as you progress through phases.
During Phase 4 (Execution), track all files created by the skill:
outputs arrayThis enables Phase 7 (Feedback Handling) to link user feedback to the skill that produced the output.
| Error | Recovery |
|---|---|
| Search fails (network) | Retry once, then proceed to creation |
| Skill creation fails | Report to user, ask for guidance |
| Execution fails | Capture in memory, still do review |
| Review times out | Skip review, complete workflow |
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.