jbvc/coding-standards-analyzer
Analyzes your codebase to discover and document coding standards, patterns, and conventions. Creates coding-standards.md with file naming, TypeScript patterns, testing standards, and architectural patterns actually used in your project.
55
55%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
67%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description is strong in specificity and distinctiveness, clearly articulating what the skill does and producing a named output artifact. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause which would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill, and the trigger term coverage could be broader to capture more natural user phrasings. The use of second-person 'your' should be replaced with third-person voice.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to document coding standards, establish a style guide, or understand existing code conventions in their project.'
Broaden trigger terms to include common variations like 'style guide', 'code style', 'best practices', 'linting', 'code conventions'.
Switch from second-person ('your codebase', 'your project') to third-person voice ('Analyzes a codebase to discover...', 'patterns actually used in the project').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'discover and document coding standards, patterns, and conventions', 'Creates coding-standards.md', 'file naming, TypeScript patterns, testing standards, and architectural patterns'. These are concrete, specific capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (analyzes codebase, creates coding-standards.md with specific content), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The 'when' is only implied by the nature of the task. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when...' caps completeness at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords like 'coding standards', 'conventions', 'TypeScript patterns', 'testing standards', 'architectural patterns', but misses common user phrasings like 'style guide', 'code style', 'linting rules', 'best practices'. Also uses second-person 'your' which doesn't directly affect this dimension but the trigger terms could be broader. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | This has a very clear niche: analyzing existing code to produce a coding-standards.md file. The specific output artifact (coding-standards.md) and the discovery/documentation focus make it unlikely to conflict with other skills like code generation or code review skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
20%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a high-level project plan or checklist than actionable instructions for Claude. It enumerates many categories to analyze but provides no concrete examples of output format, no executable code for performing analysis, and no templates for the documents it should produce. The verbosity is high relative to the actionable content delivered.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of the expected coding-standards.md output (even a partial template) so Claude knows exactly what format to produce.
Include the JSON summary schema/example so the output format is unambiguous and copy-paste ready.
Remove the enumeration of obvious analysis categories (styling, state management, data fetching, etc.) that Claude would naturally discover, and instead focus on non-obvious instructions like how to count pattern occurrences or what thresholds determine a 'standard'.
Add a validation step after generating the document, such as verifying that every documented standard has at least one concrete code example from the codebase.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is very verbose, explaining many concepts Claude already knows (what file naming conventions are, what TypeScript patterns are, what state management is). Much of the content reads like a checklist of things to look at rather than actionable instructions, and categories like 'Styling', 'Data Fetching', 'State Management' are enumerated at a level of detail that adds little value beyond what Claude would naturally do when analyzing a codebase. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite being lengthy, the skill contains zero executable code, no concrete commands, no example output format for the JSON summary, and no template for the coding-standards.md document. Instructions like 'Analyze Code Patterns' and 'Generate Standards Document' are vague directives without showing what the output should look like or how to actually perform the analysis. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced and logically ordered, and there is some error handling guidance. However, there are no validation checkpoints between steps (e.g., verifying the generated document is accurate or complete), and the steps themselves are high-level descriptions rather than precise instructions with verification. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is organized with headers and subsections, but it's a monolithic wall of text that could benefit from splitting detailed analysis categories into separate reference files. The inline enumeration of every possible pattern category (styling, state management, data fetching, etc.) bloats the main skill file when these could be referenced externally. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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