This description is too terse and vague to effectively guide skill selection. It lacks specific capabilities, natural trigger terms, and an explicit 'Use when...' clause. It would benefit significantly from enumerating concrete actions and specifying when Claude should select this skill.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'format code', 'auto-format', 'prettify', 'fix formatting', 'code style', 'lint'.

Specify concrete actions and scope, e.g., 'Runs the project's configured code formatter (e.g., Prettier, Black, gofmt) to auto-format source files, fix indentation, and enforce consistent code style.'

Clarify what 'the projects formatter' means—mention that it detects and uses the project's existing formatter configuration to distinguish it from generic code editing skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description mentions only one vague action ('format code') without specifying what kind of formatting, what languages, or what 'the projects formatter' refers to. It lacks concrete, enumerable capabilities.	1 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is weak (just 'format code') and there is no explicit 'when' clause or trigger guidance. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause caps this at 2 per the rubric, and the weak 'what' brings it to 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'Format code' and 'formatter' are natural terms a user might say, but the description is missing common variations like 'lint', 'prettify', 'auto-format', 'code style', 'prettier', 'black', or specific file types.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Format code using the projects formatter' is somewhat specific to code formatting rather than general code tasks, but 'the projects formatter' is ambiguous and could overlap with linting, style checking, or other code quality skills.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Implementation

14%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill content is essentially a one-line restatement of the skill description with no actionable guidance. It provides no concrete commands, no formatter name, no examples, and no workflow — making it nearly useless as an instruction for Claude. It fails on every dimension except avoiding verbosity, and even there it crosses from concise into vacuous.

Suggestions

Add the specific formatter command(s) to run, e.g., `black`, `prettier`, `rustfmt`, or a project-specific script with exact invocation syntax.

Include at least one concrete example showing how to format a file or set of files, with expected command-line usage.

Add a brief workflow: 1) identify files to format, 2) run the formatter command, 3) verify changes (e.g., diff or re-run with --check flag).

If the project uses a specific configuration file or has formatting conventions, reference them or link to the relevant config file.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is extremely brief, which avoids verbosity, but it's so terse that it provides no useful information beyond restating the skill description. There's nothing unnecessary, but there's also nothing of value.	2 / 3
Actionability	The content is entirely vague — no concrete commands, no code examples, no mention of which formatter to use, no file paths, no flags. It describes rather than instructs.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no workflow, no steps, no sequence, and no validation. Even for a simple task like running a formatter, there should be at minimum a concrete command and expected outcome.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	There is no structure whatsoever — no sections, no headers, no references to other files. It's a single sentence with no organization.	1 / 3
	Total	5 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation