CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

igmarin/rails-agent-skills

Curated library of 42 public AI agent skills for Ruby on Rails development, plus 5 callable workflow skills. Organized by category: planning, testing, code-quality, ddd, engines, infrastructure, api, patterns, context, orchestration, and workflows. Covers code review, architecture, security, testing (RSpec), engines, service objects, DDD patterns, and TDD automation.

75

Quality

94%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

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 niche: handling code review feedback on Rails code. It explicitly states when to use it, lists specific concrete actions, and uses natural trigger terms. The only minor note is the use of second person ('you have received') which technically violates the third-person voice guideline, but the description is otherwise excellent.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: evaluating reviewer suggestions, pushing back with technical reasoning, avoiding performative agreement, implementing feedback one item at a time, and triggering re-review. These are clear, actionable capabilities.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (evaluating suggestions, pushing back, implementing feedback safely, triggering re-review) and 'when' ('Use when you have received code review feedback on Rails code and need to decide what to implement, how to respond, and in what order').

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural keywords users would say: 'code review feedback', 'Rails code', 'reviewer suggestions', 'pushing back', 're-review'. These are terms a developer would naturally use when dealing with code review responses.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive — specifically targets responding to code review feedback on Rails code, which is a clear niche. Unlikely to conflict with general coding skills, git skills, or other review-related skills due to the specific focus on the response/implementation workflow.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Implementation

77%

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

This is a well-crafted instruction skill with strong workflow clarity and actionability. The HARD-GATE framework, classification tables, and pushback template give Claude concrete, specific guidance for handling code review feedback. Minor weaknesses include some redundancy between the Common Mistakes, Red Flags, and Forbidden Responses sections, and the progressive disclosure could be improved by offloading supplementary content to referenced files.

Suggestions

Consolidate 'Common Mistakes' and 'Red Flags' into a single section or move them to an asset file to reduce redundancy with the main workflow content.

Ensure the referenced assets/response_templates.md file actually exists in the bundle to support the progressive disclosure reference.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is mostly efficient and well-structured with tables that compress information well. However, the 'Forbidden Responses' section and 'Common Mistakes' / 'Red Flags' sections have some overlap and redundancy (e.g., 'implementing before reading all feedback' appears in multiple places). The content could be tightened by ~20% without losing signal.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete, specific guidance at every step: a clear classification framework with explicit actions per category, a structured pushback template with a realistic example, a prioritized implementation order, and explicit re-review trigger criteria. This is an instruction-only skill that achieves high actionability through specificity rather than code.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step HARD-GATE sequence is clearly ordered with an explicit gate ('DO NOT start implementing before completing steps 1-4'). The implementation order section provides a clear sequence with validation checkpoints (test each fix individually, run full suite before re-review). The re-review trigger table provides explicit decision criteria for the final step.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references an asset file (assets/response_templates.md) and links to related skills, which is good structure. However, the bundle has no actual files provided, so we can't verify the reference works. The main content is somewhat long (~120 lines) and the Common Mistakes and Red Flags sections could potentially be moved to a reference file, as they partially duplicate earlier content.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

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