CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
PluginPublic

pleaseai/claude-md-management

Tools to maintain and improve CLAUDE.md files - audit quality, capture session learnings, and keep project memory current.

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

quality-criteria.mdskills/claude-md-improver/references/

CLAUDE.md Quality Criteria

Scoring Rubric

1. Commands/Workflows (20 points)

20 points: All essential commands documented with context

  • Build, test, lint, deploy commands present
  • Development workflow clear
  • Common operations documented

15 points: Most commands present, some missing context

10 points: Basic commands only, no workflow

5 points: Few commands, many missing

0 points: No commands documented

2. Architecture Clarity (20 points)

20 points: Clear codebase map

  • Key directories explained
  • Module relationships documented
  • Entry points identified
  • Data flow described where relevant

15 points: Good structure overview, minor gaps

10 points: Basic directory listing only

5 points: Vague or incomplete

0 points: No architecture info

3. Non-Obvious Patterns (15 points)

15 points: Gotchas and quirks captured

  • Known issues documented
  • Workarounds explained
  • Edge cases noted
  • "Why we do it this way" for unusual patterns

10 points: Some patterns documented

5 points: Minimal pattern documentation

0 points: No patterns or gotchas

4. Conciseness (15 points)

15 points: Dense, valuable content

  • No filler or obvious info
  • Each line adds value
  • No redundancy with code comments

10 points: Mostly concise, some padding

5 points: Verbose in places

0 points: Mostly filler or restates obvious code

5. Currency (15 points)

15 points: Reflects current codebase

  • Commands work as documented
  • File references accurate
  • Tech stack current

10 points: Mostly current, minor staleness

5 points: Several outdated references

0 points: Severely outdated

6. Actionability (15 points)

15 points: Instructions are executable

  • Commands can be copy-pasted
  • Steps are concrete
  • Paths are real

10 points: Mostly actionable

5 points: Some vague instructions

0 points: Vague or theoretical

Assessment Process

  1. Read the CLAUDE.md file completely
  2. Cross-reference with actual codebase:
    • Run documented commands (mentally or actually)
    • Check if referenced files exist
    • Verify architecture descriptions
  3. Score each criterion
  4. Calculate total and assign grade
  5. List specific issues found
  6. Propose concrete improvements

Rules Quality Criteria

For .claude/rules/*.md files:

Frontmatter Validity

  • paths: uses comma-separated format (NOT YAML array)
  • Path patterns match existing files in codebase
  • No overlapping rules with conflicting instructions

Content Quality

  • Clear, specific instructions for the targeted paths
  • No duplication with main CLAUDE.md
  • Appropriate scope (not too broad, not too narrow)

Example Valid Rule

---
paths: src/api/**/*.ts,src/services/**/*.ts
---

# API Development Rules

- Use dependency injection pattern
- All endpoints must have OpenAPI docs

Common Rule Issues

  • Using YAML array syntax: paths: [a, b] (wrong)
  • Paths that don't match any files
  • Overly broad rules that should be in CLAUDE.md
  • Conflicting instructions between rules

Red Flags

  • Commands that would fail (wrong paths, missing deps)
  • References to deleted files/folders
  • Outdated tech versions
  • Copy-paste from templates without customization
  • Generic advice not specific to the project
  • "TODO" items never completed
  • Duplicate info across multiple CLAUDE.md files
  • Rules with invalid paths: frontmatter syntax

README.md

tile.json