name: skill-capability-matcher description: | This skill should be used when matching user requirements to available skills from a compiled registry. It receives a skill registry (from registry-loader) and user requirements, then scores each skill based on capability alignment, producing prioritized matches with confidence scores.

Triggers: "match skills to requirements", "find relevant skills for workflow", "which skill handles X", "score skill capabilities", "/build" (after registry load), "find skills for this task", "match my requirements to skills".

Second step in looplia workflow building pipeline: takes user requirements and skill registry, recommends skill sequences with missions. Designs one workflow step → one skill-executor → multiple skills orchestration pattern. model: claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

Skill Capability Matcher

Match natural language requirements to available skills, designing an optimal workflow step sequence.

Purpose

Parse user's workflow description, understand their intent, and recommend which skills should handle each part of the workflow. Output includes step IDs, skill names, missions, and data flow.

Process

Step 1: Parse Requirements

Extract from the user's description:

Input Types:

video transcript
audio transcript
article/blog post
documentation
raw text
structured data (JSON/YAML)

Processing Goals:

analyze (deep understanding)
summarize (condensation)
generate (create new content)
transform (change format)
extract (pull specific data)
validate (check correctness)

Output Format:

JSON structure
Markdown document
Summary text
Structured data

Step 2: Load Registry

Read the plugin registry from registry-loader output (v0.7.0):

{
  "plugins": [...],
  "summary": { "totalSkills": N, "installedSkills": N, "availableSkills": N }
}

Build a capability index from skill descriptions and inferred capabilities. Include installed status when scoring - prefer installed skills for immediate execution.

Step 3: Match Capabilities

Score each skill by:

Description match - Does skill description align with requirements?
Capability overlap - Do inferred capabilities match processing goals?
Input/output compatibility - Can skill handle input type and produce expected output?

Step 4: Design Step Sequence

For each matched skill:

Create a step ID (kebab-case, descriptive)
Determine dependencies (needs:)
Write a mission description (what to accomplish)
Define data flow (input → output)

Step 5: Recommend Sequence

Order skills logically:

Analysis skills first (understand content)
Generation/transformation skills second
Assembly/output skills last

Ensure proper data dependencies.

Step 6: Flag Gaps

If requirements can't be fully satisfied:

List unmatched capabilities as gaps
Suggest creating custom skills if needed
Indicate if workflow is partial

Input

Provide:

User's natural language description
Registry JSON from plugin-registry-scanner

Output Schema

{
  "requirements": {
    "inputType": "video transcript",
    "goals": ["extract key points", "generate outline"],
    "outputFormat": "structured JSON"
  },
  "recommendations": [
    {
      "skill": "media-reviewer",
      "suggestedStepId": "analyze-content",
      "goalId": "analyze",
      "matchScore": 0.92,
      "capabilities": ["content analysis", "theme extraction"],
      "mission": "Deep analysis of video transcript. Extract key themes, quotes, and narrative structure.",
      "rationale": "Primary skill for content understanding"
    },
    {
      "skill": "idea-synthesis",
      "suggestedStepId": "generate-ideas",
      "goalId": "generate",
      "matchScore": 0.85,
      "capabilities": ["idea generation", "hooks and angles"],
      "mission": "Generate hooks, angles, and questions from the analysis. Read user profile for personalization.",
      "rationale": "Creates engaging content ideas from analysis"
    }
  ],
  "suggestedSequence": ["analyze-content", "generate-ideas", "build-output"],
  "dataFlow": {
    "analyze-content": {
      "needs": [],
      "provides": "analysis.json"
    },
    "generate-ideas": {
      "needs": ["analyze-content"],
      "provides": "ideas.json"
    },
    "build-output": {
      "needs": ["analyze-content", "generate-ideas"],
      "provides": "output.json"
    }
  },
  "gaps": [],
  "customSkillNeeded": false,
  "clarificationNeeded": true,
  "clarifications": {
    "sections": [
      {
        "id": "input",
        "title": "Input",
        "completed": false,
        "questions": [
          {
            "id": "content-type",
            "text": "What type of content will this workflow process?",
            "type": "single-select",
            "options": [
              { "id": "video", "label": "Video transcripts", "inferred": true },
              { "id": "audio", "label": "Audio transcripts" },
              { "id": "text", "label": "Text articles" },
              { "id": "web", "label": "Web pages (fetched via search)" }
            ],
            "reason": "Inferred 'video' from description, confirm or change"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "id": "goals",
        "title": "Goals",
        "completed": false,
        "questions": [
          {
            "id": "primary-goal",
            "text": "What are the primary goals for this workflow?",
            "type": "multi-select",
            "options": [
              { "id": "analyze", "label": "Analyze and extract key insights" },
              { "id": "summarize", "label": "Create structured summaries" },
              { "id": "generate", "label": "Generate creative content ideas" },
              { "id": "document", "label": "Build comprehensive reports" }
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "depth",
            "text": "How deep should the analysis be?",
            "type": "single-select",
            "options": [
              { "id": "quick", "label": "Quick overview (1-2 key points)" },
              { "id": "standard", "label": "Standard analysis (5-7 key points)" },
              { "id": "deep", "label": "Deep analysis (comprehensive)" }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "id": "output",
        "title": "Output",
        "completed": false,
        "questions": [
          {
            "id": "format",
            "text": "What output format do you need?",
            "type": "single-select",
            "options": [
              { "id": "json", "label": "Structured JSON" },
              { "id": "markdown", "label": "Markdown document" },
              { "id": "both", "label": "Both JSON and Markdown" }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "id": "review",
        "title": "Review",
        "completed": false,
        "questions": []
      }
    ]
  }
}

Scoring Guidelines

Match Type	Score
Exact capability match	0.9-1.0
Strong description overlap	0.7-0.9
Partial capability match	0.5-0.7
Weak/inferred match	0.3-0.5
No clear match	< 0.3

Scoring Rubric

Use these concrete criteria when assigning scores:

Relevance Score (Primary Factor)

90-100: Skill's primary purpose directly addresses requirement
70-89: Skill clearly capable of addressing requirement
50-69: Skill partially addresses requirement
30-49: Skill tangentially related
0-29: Minimal or no relevance

Completeness Score

90-100: Skill fully addresses all aspects of requirement
70-89: Skill addresses most aspects, minor gaps
50-69: Skill addresses core need, notable gaps
Below 50: Significant portions unaddressed

Specificity Score

90-100: Skill specifically designed for this exact use case
70-89: Skill well-suited for use case category
50-69: General-purpose skill applicable to use case
Below 50: Very general skill with broad applicability

Confidence Calculation

confidence = (relevance * 0.5) + (completeness * 0.3) + (specificity * 0.2)

Minimum threshold: 60% - Skills below this should not be recommended.

Semantic Matching Guidelines

Match requirements to skills beyond simple keyword matching:

1. Synonym Recognition

Match conceptually equivalent terms:

"authentication" ↔ "login", "session management", "user verification"
"database" ↔ "data persistence", "storage", specific ORMs
"analyze" ↔ "review", "examine", "inspect", "assess"
"generate" ↔ "create", "produce", "synthesize", "build"

2. Hierarchical Matching

Understand skill scope and specificity:

General skill may satisfy specific requirement (e.g., "api-client" for "REST calls")
Prefer specific skill over general when available (e.g., "stripe-integration" over "payment-api")

3. Intent Extraction

Focus on what user wants to accomplish, not just keywords:

"I need to send emails" → match email/notification skills
"Process video content" → match media-reviewer, not just skills with "video" in name
"Build a report from data" → match assembly/documentation skills

Edge Cases

Scenario	Handling
No matches above 60% threshold	Return empty `recommendations[]` with `gaps` listing unmet needs
Multiple skills with identical scores	Prefer more specific skill (higher specificity score)
Ambiguous user requirements	Set `clarificationNeeded: true` with targeted questions
Skill matches multiple requirements	Include once with highest-scoring requirement as primary
Installed vs available skills	Prefer installed skills when scores are within 10%

Mission Writing Guidelines

Each mission should:

Start with an action verb (Analyze, Extract, Generate, Create, Transform)
Describe the specific goal for this step
Mention key outputs expected
Reference context from previous steps if applicable
Be 2-4 sentences

Good mission example:

Deep analysis of video transcript. Extract key themes, important quotes with timestamps, and narrative structure. Focus on insights that would interest the user based on their profile.

Bad mission example:

Analyze the content.

Important Rules

Skills-first - Never recommend agents, only skills
Include missions - Every recommendation must have a detailed mission
Score realistically - Don't inflate match scores
Complete data flow - Ensure all dependencies are resolvable
Flag gaps honestly - Report capabilities that can't be matched
Include goalId - Each recommendation must have a goalId linking it to a clarification goal

Clarifications Schema (v0.6.4)

When user requirements are ambiguous, include clarifying questions in the response. The wizard UI uses these to gather additional context before generating the final workflow.

Clarification Fields

Field	Type	Description
`clarificationNeeded`	boolean	Whether clarifying questions should be shown
`clarifications.sections`	Section[]	Tab-based sections for wizard navigation

Section Schema

{
  "id": "goals",
  "title": "Goals",
  "completed": false,
  "questions": [...]
}

Question Schema

{
  "id": "primary-goal",
  "text": "What are the primary goals for this workflow?",
  "type": "single-select | multi-select | text",
  "options": [
    { "id": "analyze", "label": "Analyze and extract key insights", "inferred": true }
  ],
  "reason": "Optional explanation for why this was inferred"
}

Question Types

Type	Description	Use Case
`single-select`	One option only (●/○)	Content type, depth level
`multi-select`	Multiple options (✓/☐)	Goals, features to include
`text`	Free-form input	Custom names, descriptions

Inferred Values

Set inferred: true on options that match keywords in the user's description:

"video" or "youtube" → infer video content type
"analyze" → infer analyze goal
"summar" → infer summarize goal
"generat" or "creat" → infer generate goal

Recommendation goalId

Each recommendation must include a goalId that links to a goal option:

{
  "skill": "media-reviewer",
  "suggestedStepId": "analyze-content",
  "goalId": "analyze",
  "matchScore": 0.92
}

This allows the wizard to filter recommendations based on selected goals in real-time.

Structured Preferences for Enriched Prompt (v0.6.4)

When wizard answers are included in the enriched prompt (via "User clarifications: Q: ... A: ..."), these become structured preferences that MUST be incorporated into the workflow.

Common Preference Types

Preference Category	Example Questions	How to Use
PLATFORMS	"Which social media platforms?"	Inject into social/output step missions
ARTICLE_COUNT	"How many articles/items?"	Inject into search/filter step missions
FOCUS_AREAS	"Which topics/areas to focus on?"	Inject into search and analysis missions
OUTPUT_FORMAT	"What format should output be?"	Inject into final output step mission
DEPTH	"How deep should analysis be?"	Adjust analysis step detail level

Preference Extraction from Enriched Prompt

When receiving an enriched prompt like:

User clarifications: Q: Which platforms? A: twitter, linkedin. Q: How many articles? A: top5. Q: Focus areas? A: llm, adoption.

Extract as structured data:

PLATFORMS: twitter, linkedin
ARTICLE_COUNT: 5
FOCUS_AREAS: llm, adoption

Mission Templates with Preferences

WITHOUT preferences (BAD):

Search for AI news articles.

WITH preferences (GOOD):

Search for top 5 AI news articles focusing on LLM developments and adoption trends.