CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

gamussa/flighty

Query local Flighty flight data and preview or add flights through a deterministic Python CLI.

77

Quality

97%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body is an exemplar of skill writing: lean rule-dense prose with no filler, a strictly ordered four-step workflow with explicit success/failure validation and a preview-before-write checkpoint for the risky database write, and a clean one-level split between operational policy (SKILL.md) and CLI reference (references/commands.md). No rubric-relevant defects were found.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~30-line body is dense, purely operational prose with zero padding — no explanation of concepts Claude already knows (no SQLite or JSON primers), and every sentence carries a rule, a command pattern, or a boundary (e.g., "An omitted date selects the most recent scheduled matching instance, which may be a future flight"). This matches the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor; a 4 would require over-explanation that could be trimmed, and none is evident. The one version mention ("Python 3.11+") is a genuine runtime requirement, not time-sensitive drift.

5 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is directly executable: an exact invocation path ("python3 .tessl/plugins/gamussa/flighty/skills/flighty/scripts/flighty.py --help") with a fallback rule, copy-paste-ready command patterns for the common cases ("list --upcoming --limit 1", "stats --year YYYY", "add ... --write --backup PATH"), a precise output contract ("{ok:true, command, data}" to stdout/exit 0; "{ok:false,error}" to stderr/exit 1), and a required-inputs checklist for creation. Full argument examples are one clearly signaled reference away in references/commands.md, which contains complete runnable examples — matching the 'fully executable; copy-paste ready' anchor. A 4 would imply missing key details, and none were found.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four explicitly ordered steps ("Process steps in order. Do not skip ahead.") — locate CLI, select operation, execute, explain result — with explicit validation checkpoints: the success/failure envelope and exit codes define how to verify each execution, and the risky database write has a validate-then-commit loop ("add previews by default", write only after user authorization, mandatory "--write --backup PATH", and "report whether an add was previewed, created, or already present"). Error recovery is addressed ("Handle errors using the stated diagnostic"). The destructive-write cap at 3 does not apply since validation is present, and the checklist element ("obtain the full flight code, both airport codes, and explicit departure and arrival ISO datetimes with UTC offsets") satisfies the 5 anchor; a 4 would require missing checkpoints, which the envelope spec and preview-before-write provide.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle structure matches the top anchor: SKILL.md is a concise operational overview, detailed arguments and examples live exactly one level deep in references/commands.md, clearly signaled ("Read [references/commands.md](references/commands.md) for arguments and examples"), and the verified file contains a complete CLI table with examples without referencing further files. The scripts/flighty.py bundle is referenced by resolvable relative path. No content that belongs in a separate file is inlined, and navigation is trivial.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description: third-person voice, concrete capability list covering all operations, explicit trigger phrases for when to use it, and a clear scope boundary that prevents mis-triggering. The only gap is modest synonym coverage of natural trigger phrasings.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates the full set of concrete operations: "Query the local Flighty macOS database for personal or friends' flights, status, delay forecasts, airport or airline searches, statistics, and connections; preview or add a flight using the bundled CLI" — each maps to a real CLI capability with no vague filler. This matches the anchor 'lists multiple specific concrete actions; comprehensive coverage'; a 4 would require minor coverage gaps, but every command domain (list/search, get/status/forecast, airports/airlines, stats, connections, add) is named.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: the "what" is the first sentence (query flights, status, forecasts, searches, statistics, connections; preview or add), and the "when" is concrete with quoted trigger phrases ("Use for requests such as 'my upcoming flights', 'my Flighty stats', or 'add this flight to Flighty'"). It even adds a scope boundary ("Requires a local Flighty database; does not search global live flight schedules"), matching the top anchor exactly; a 4 would require a less explicit 'when'.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural user phrasings — "my upcoming flights", "my Flighty stats", "add this flight to Flighty" — plus domain terms like status, delay forecasts, and connections, which is good keyword coverage. It falls short of the 5 anchor ('comprehensive coverage of natural terms including synonyms') because common variations users would actually say, such as "is my flight delayed", "my trips/itinerary", or "layover", are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche (the Flighty app's local macOS database) with distinct triggers and an explicit boundary excluding global live flight schedule lookups, minimizing overlap with generic flight-tracker or travel skills. A 4 ('minor overlap risk with closely related skills') would apply if it could be confused with a sibling skill, but the Flighty-specific naming and boundary statement prevent that.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents