popey/java-quality-gate
Run quality checks on Java code before committing. Validates against best practices, enterprise standards, and common issues.
81
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
75%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 description effectively communicates when to use the skill with a clear mandatory trigger ('MUST be run before any git commit operation that includes Java files'), making it strong on completeness and distinctiveness. However, it could be improved by listing more specific quality checks performed and including additional natural trigger terms users might use when seeking Java code validation.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'checks null safety, validates naming conventions, detects code smells, enforces formatting standards'
Include additional natural trigger terms users might say: 'lint', 'static analysis', 'code review', 'checkstyle', '.java files'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Java code quality checks) and mentions some actions (validates against best practices, enterprise standards, common issues), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'check null safety', 'verify naming conventions', or 'detect memory leaks'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (run quality checks, validate against best practices/standards/issues) AND when (before any git commit operation that includes Java files) with explicit trigger guidance using 'MUST be run before'. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'Java', 'git commit', and 'quality checks', but missing common variations users might say like 'lint', 'code review', 'static analysis', '.java files', or 'checkstyle'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche targeting specifically Java code quality before commits - distinct from general code review, other language linters, or non-commit quality tools. The combination of 'Java' + 'commit' + 'quality checks' creates a unique trigger profile. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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 solid, actionable skill with executable code and clear workflow. Its main weakness is length—the extensive enumeration of Java anti-patterns and inline configuration examples bloat the file when Claude already knows these patterns. The content would benefit from splitting reference material into separate files.
Suggestions
Move the detailed checks list (sections 1-6) to a separate CHECKS.md file and reference it, since Claude already knows Java best practices
Extract the enterprise-standards.md example and .java-quality-gate.yml configuration into separate template files rather than inline examples
Condense the 'When to Use' section—the trigger conditions are self-evident from the skill's purpose
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary verbosity. The extensive lists of checks (sections 1-6) could be condensed since Claude knows Java best practices. The enterprise standards example and configuration sections add bulk that could be referenced externally. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash scripts for the quality gate, concrete grep patterns for detecting issues, and copy-paste ready commands for external tool integration. The implementation section is complete and runnable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 4-step workflow with explicit validation checkpoints: detect files → run validators → report findings → gate commit. Includes feedback loop with 'fix before committing' and explicit exit codes for pass/fail states. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably structured with clear sections, but the skill is monolithic at ~200 lines. The enterprise standards, configuration, and external tools sections could be split into separate reference files with links from the main skill. | 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents