CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

igmarin/rails-agent-skills

Curated library of AI agent skills for Ruby on Rails development. Covers code review, architecture, security, testing (RSpec), engines, service objects, DDD patterns, and workflow automation.

95

2.21x
Quality

97%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

91%

2.21x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

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 a strong skill description that clearly defines its scope (Rails engine/Railtie review), lists specific areas of coverage, and includes an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause. The trigger terms are natural and domain-appropriate, and the skill occupies a distinct niche that minimizes conflict risk with other skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: reviewing namespace boundaries, host-app integration, safe initialization, migrations, generators, and dummy app test coverage. Also specifies it prioritizes architectural risks.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (covers namespace boundaries, host-app integration, safe initialization, migrations, generators, dummy app test coverage, prioritizes architectural risks) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when reviewing a Rails engine, mountable engine, or Railtie').

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'Rails engine', 'mountable engine', 'Railtie', 'migrations', 'generators', 'dummy app', 'namespace boundaries', 'host-app integration'. These are terms a developer would naturally use when working with Rails engines.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive niche targeting Rails engines, mountable engines, and Railties specifically. The combination of these domain-specific triggers makes it very unlikely to conflict with general Rails or Ruby review 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 that is concise, actionable, and well-structured. It respects Claude's intelligence by focusing on domain-specific review heuristics rather than explaining Rails engine basics. The combination of quick-reference tables, ordered workflow, concrete code examples, and clear output format makes this immediately usable for engine reviews.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every section is lean and purposeful. No unnecessary explanations of what Rails engines are or how they work — it assumes Claude knows Rails deeply and focuses only on review-specific guidance that adds value.

3 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete code examples showing both bad and good patterns, a specific review checklist with exact things to check (e.g., `isolate_namespace`, `config.to_prepare`), and a clear output format with required fields per finding including 'smallest credible fix'.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step review order is clearly sequenced from high-level (engine type) to specific (dummy app tests) to summary. The severity tiers and instruction to flag High findings first provide a clear prioritization framework, and the output format acts as a validation checkpoint ensuring completeness.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill provides a concise overview with a well-signaled one-level-deep reference to FINDINGS.md for detailed severity lists and common fixes. The integration table clearly signals when to chain to related skills. Content is appropriately split between the overview and referenced files.

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents