This is a well-structured orchestration skill with clear, actionable steps and a strong workflow. Its main weakness is verbosity in the per-language task enumeration, which repeats the same pattern multiple times when a more compact representation would suffice. The output template and verdict criteria are well-defined and practical.

Suggestions

Condense the per-language task lists into a single compact mapping table (e.g., language → validators) instead of repeating the full Task invocation pattern for each language separately.

Remove some of the restated formatting rules that are already implicit from the markdown template (e.g., 'One line per validator in the summary table' is obvious from the table format).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is mostly efficient but has some redundancy. The per-language task lists (Go, Python, TypeScript) repeat the same pattern verbosely when a more compact table or rule-based description would suffice. The formatting rules section also restates things that are already clear from the template.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides executable bash commands for detecting changed files, specific tool invocation patterns with example prompts, concrete output format with a markdown template, and clear decision rules for which validators to run based on file extensions.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The four-step workflow is clearly sequenced: determine validators → run in parallel → aggregate results → verdict. Each step has explicit instructions, the verdict step includes clear pass/fail criteria, and the SHOULD violation handling provides a feedback mechanism for justification.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is well-structured with clear headings and steps, but it's somewhat long for a single file. The per-language validator lists could be condensed into a reference table. No bundle files are provided, so the individual validator skills (go-effective, python-style, etc.) are referenced but not available for navigation.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

32%

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 too terse and lacks both specificity about what validators are run and explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. It provides a general sense of purpose but would be difficult to distinguish from other code quality or testing skills in a large skill library.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'validate', 'check code', 'lint', 'run checks', 'verify changes', 'pre-commit'.

List specific concrete actions such as 'Runs linters, type checkers, and test suites against recent git changes to catch errors before committing'.

Clarify what 'recent code changes' means (e.g., staged changes, uncommitted changes, changes since last commit) to improve distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a domain (validation of code changes) and one action ('run all validators'), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like linting, type checking, test execution, or other validator types.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does ('run all validators against recent code changes') but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or trigger guidance, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is also quite thin, warranting a score of 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant terms like 'validators' and 'code changes', but misses common natural variations users might say such as 'lint', 'check', 'verify', 'CI', 'pre-commit', 'static analysis', or 'test'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Somewhat specific with 'validators' and 'recent code changes' narrowing the scope, but could overlap with testing skills, linting skills, or CI/CD skills due to lack of precise boundaries.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Reviewed

20 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation