Audit and improve skill collections with an 8-dimension scoring framework, duplication detection, remediation planning, and CI quality gates; use when evaluating skill quality, generating remediation plans, validating report format, or enforcing repository-wide skill artifact conventions.
Does it follow best practices?
Evaluation — 93%
↑ 1.33xAgent success when using this tile
Validation for skill structure
Guide for creating remediation plans from skill quality audit results.
Use this guide when:
sh skills/skill-quality-auditor/scripts/evaluate.sh <skill-name> --json.context/audits/<skill-name>-audit-YYYY-MM-DD.mdskills/skill-quality-auditor/templates/remediation-plan-template.yamlAll remediation plans follow this structure:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Current Score | Actual score from audit (e.g., 84/120, 70%) |
| Target Score | Desired score (typically +15-20 points) |
| Current/Target Grade | Letter grade (F/D/C/B/A) |
| Priority | Critical/High/Medium/Low |
| Effort | S/M/L estimate |
Focus Areas: Top 2-3 dimensions requiring attention
Verdict: One-line summary: "Priority improvements required" vs "Targeted improvements recommended"
Identify the top 3-5 issues from the audit:
| Issue | Dimension | Severity | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Description | D# (score/max) | Critical/High/Medium/Low | Why this matters |
Prioritize by:
For each priority dimension:
### Phase N: [Dimension Name] - Priority: [Priority]
**Target**: Increase from [current]/[max] to [target]/[max] (+[delta] points)
#### Step N.1: [Specific Action]
**[File to modify]**: `path/to/file.md`
[Code example if applicable]When documenting code examples that contain markdown code fences, use 4 backticks:
**BAD**:
```markdown
Some markdown content here
```
**GOOD**:
```markdown
Good content here
```Measurable targets for verification:
| Criterion | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Dimension Score | >= target/max |
| Overall Score | >= target-score (target-grade) |
| References Created | >= N files |
| Phase | Effort | Time |
|---|---|---|
| Phase 1 | S/M/L | HH hours |
| Phase 2 | S/M/L | HH hours |
| Total | M/L | X hours |
Rate plans based on:
| Rating | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 9-10/10 | Template gold standard, comprehensive |
| 8/10 | Follows Format B well, detailed code examples |
| 7/10 | Good structure but gaps in specifics |
| 6/10 | Major restructuring needed |
| <5/10 | Fundamental issues with approach |
For D3 (Anti-Pattern Quality) improvements:
## Anti-Patterns
### NEVER: [Action]
**WHY**: [Reason]
**BAD**:
```[language]
[bad code]
```
**GOOD**:
```[language]
[good code]
```For D5 (Progressive Disclosure) improvements:
skills/<skill>/references/ directory## Quick Reference
| Topic | Reference |
|-------|-----------|
| Topic Name | [references/topic.md](references/topic.md) |For D7 (Pattern Recognition) improvements:
Update frontmatter description:
---
name: skill-name
description: |
[Core description]. Use when: [trigger phrases].
Keywords: [comma-separated keywords]
---After implementing remediation:
sh skills/skill-quality-auditor/scripts/evaluate.sh <skill-name> --json
bunx markdownlint-cli2 "skills/<skill-name>/**/*.md"Compare new score against target in plan.
framework-skill-judge-dimensions.md - Understanding the 8 dimensionsframework-scoring-rubric.md - How scores are calculatedaggregation-pattern.md - For larger consolidation effortsInstall with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i pantheon-ai/skill-quality-auditor@0.1.4evals
scenario-1
scenario-2
scenario-3
scenario-4
scenario-5
references
scripts