Develop or review put.io SDK repositories, API clients, and client libraries across TypeScript, Swift, Kotlin, and similar packages. Use when adding or changing namespaces, tightening request or error types, aligning SDK behavior with backend and app usage, updating SDK verification flows, or checking how an SDK repo should be documented and released.
97
97%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 is a strong skill description that clearly defines its scope around put.io SDK development and review, lists concrete actions, and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with specific trigger scenarios. The description is well-structured, uses third person voice, and provides enough specificity to distinguish it from general coding or API skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: developing/reviewing SDK repositories, adding/changing namespaces, tightening request/error types, aligning SDK behavior with backend, updating verification flows, and handling documentation/release processes. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (develop or review put.io SDK repositories, API clients, and client libraries across multiple languages) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause listing specific trigger scenarios like adding namespaces, tightening types, aligning SDK behavior, updating verification flows, and checking documentation/release). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'SDK', 'API clients', 'client libraries', 'TypeScript', 'Swift', 'Kotlin', 'namespaces', 'request types', 'error types', 'put.io', 'verification flows', 'documented and released'. Good coverage of domain-specific terms a developer would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific product scope (put.io), the specific languages listed, and the narrow domain of SDK development. Very unlikely to conflict with other skills given the combination of product name and SDK-specific actions. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, well-structured SDK development skill that provides actionable, domain-specific guidance without unnecessary verbosity. The source-of-truth ordering, endpoint change recipe, and verification layering are particularly valuable non-obvious instructions. The main weakness is the inability to verify that referenced bundle files (sdk-vision.md, patterns.md, language-notes.md) actually exist, though the references themselves are well-organized.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient throughout. It assumes Claude understands SDK development, API clients, and typed languages. No unnecessary explanations of what SDKs are or how packages work. Every section earns its place with domain-specific, non-obvious guidance like the source-of-truth order and the endpoint change recipe. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable commands (rg searches, verify commands, gradle/make invocations), a specific ordered recipe for endpoint changes, and clear verification patterns. The endpoint change recipe gives exact steps with real shell commands for tracing dependencies across repos. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The main workflow is clearly sequenced (8 steps), the endpoint change recipe provides a traceable ordered process, and verification includes explicit validation checkpoints ('Run the repo's canonical verify command and fix failures before continuing'). The guardrails section provides clear constraints, and there's a feedback loop around verification before proceeding. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to sdk-vision.md, patterns.md, and language-notes.md are well-signaled and one level deep, which is good. However, no bundle files were provided to verify these references exist, and the skill itself is moderately long with content (like the full verification examples) that could potentially live in referenced files. The 'Start Here' section does a good job directing readers to only what they need. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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