Auto-syncs stale docstrings and README when function signatures change. Detects documentation drift after refactors, parameter additions, or return type changes. Dry-run by default — proposes before writing.
87
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
86%
1.59xAverage score across 17 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that clearly defines its purpose (syncing documentation after code changes), provides extensive natural trigger terms that users would actually say, and specifies important behavioral constraints (proposal report, explicit approval for README edits). It is highly specific, complete, and distinctive with minimal risk of conflicting with other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: keeping docstrings accurate, updating README sections, handling function signature changes, parameter additions/removals, return type changes, symbol renames/deletions. Also specifies behavioral details like showing a proposal report and requiring confirmation. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (keeps docstrings and README sections accurate after code changes, shows proposal report, requires confirmation) and 'when' (explicit trigger scenarios and quoted user phrases). The 'Use this whenever...' and 'Also trigger when...' clauses are explicit and thorough. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'update the docs', 'sync docs after my refactor', 'my API changed', 'fix the docstring', 'check if my docs are still accurate', plus technical triggers like 'function signature changed', 'parameter was added or removed', 'return type changed'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Occupies a clear niche: documentation synchronization specifically after code changes. The combination of docstrings, README updates, and code-change triggers (signature changes, parameter changes, renames) makes it highly distinct from general documentation or general code editing skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is an excellent skill file that demonstrates strong design across all dimensions. It is concise yet comprehensive, with concrete examples illustrating edge cases (decorator-only changes, body-only semantic drift), executable commands, a well-sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints, and appropriate progressive disclosure to reference files. The safety boundaries (write boundary, ownership rule, protected files exclusion, mandatory approval for markdown edits) are clearly articulated and well-motivated.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. It avoids explaining what docstrings are or how documentation works. Every section earns its place — the two-factor rule, ownership rule, and examples are all novel domain-specific knowledge Claude wouldn't inherently know. The examples are tightly scoped to illustrate classification edge cases. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides executable bash commands for locating and running the diff script, concrete invocation patterns with exact flags, a clear ownership rule table with specific actions per case, and worked examples showing before/after/expected behavior. The report format and stop condition are copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is clearly sequenced (steps 1-7) with explicit validation (step 6 references verify-steps.md), a critical stop condition at the top, and a clear feedback loop for uncertain cases (flag and stop). The distinction between dry-run and apply modes adds a safety checkpoint, and the ownership rule provides explicit guardrails for destructive operations (README edits require explicit approval). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md serves as a clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references to `references/workflow-steps.md`, `references/scope-bounds.md`, and `references/verify-steps.md`. The load timing instruction ('load after Step 1') is a sophisticated progressive disclosure pattern that avoids unnecessary upfront context loading. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents