CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

modern-csharp-coding-standards

Write modern, high-performance C# code using records, pattern matching, value objects, async/await, Span<T>/Memory<T>, and best-practice API design patterns. Emphasizes functional-style programming with C# 12+ features.

54

Quality

61%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/csharp-coding-standards/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-structured, actionable, and uses progressive disclosure with clear one-level-deep references and copy-paste-ready C# examples. It loses points for some restatement between Core Principles and later sections, deferred-without-snippet Span/Result topics, and the absence of explicit verification checkpoints for a standards skill.

Suggestions

Consolidate Core Principles with the later Language Patterns sections or convert them to a brief pointer to avoid restating the same rules twice.

Add one compact inline Span<T>/ArrayPool and Result<T,TError> snippet so the main guidance is self-contained rather than only deferred to reference files.

Add a short 'Verifying standards' checkpoint (e.g., 'dotnet build with <TreatWarningsAsErrors>, Roslyn analyzers, or unit tests for value-object validation') to lift workflow clarity for application of the standards.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with compact code examples and tight DO/DON'T lists, but the eight Core Principles are partially restated by later sections and a few inline blocks (e.g., the full Code Organization example) repeat guidance that the referenced files already cover, so it sits above the 3 anchor but not at fully lean.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable C# examples for records, value objects, pattern matching, nullability, async/ValueTask/IAsyncEnumerable, and code organization are copy-paste ready with minor gaps (Span/Memory and Result<T,TError> are deferred to references without an inline snippet).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

This is a standards/reference skill rather than a batch or destructive operation, so multi-step sequencing is less applicable; the DO/DON'T summary provides actionable rules but there are no explicit validation or verification checkpoints for applying the standards (e.g., build/analyzer checks), capping it at 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview with four clearly signaled one-level-deep references (value-objects-and-patterns.md, performance-and-api-design.md, composition-and-error-handling.md, anti-patterns-and-reflection.md) and inline examples kept reasonable, but the reference files are not present in the bundle to verify, and a couple of sections duplicate rather than fully defer detail, so it is above the 3 anchor but not a clean 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

60%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 specific and names a clear modern-C# niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which the rubric caps at completeness 3. It is concise and third-person, with no fluff or over-claims.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when writing or refactoring C#, designing public APIs, or optimizing performance-critical code paths') to lift completeness and trigger-term quality.

Include a few natural synonyms/variations users actually say (e.g., 'C#', 'C# 12', 'dotnet code') alongside the feature names to improve trigger-term coverage.

Tighten the trailing 'Emphasizes functional-style programming with C# 12+ features.' into the main sentence or the trigger clause to avoid a lightly redundant second sentence.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific concrete capabilities (records, pattern matching, value objects, async/await, Span<T>/Memory<T>, API design) and names the C# 12+ feature scope, with only minor coverage gaps relative to the comprehensive anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' the skill does, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance in the description; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3, and it is not as low as 2 because the 'what' is concrete.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'records', 'pattern matching', 'async/await', and 'Span<T>' are natural to a C# user, but common user-facing phrases like 'C#', 'C# code', or 'refactor C#' are partly present while synonyms and raw file/keyword variations are missing, so it sits at the 'some relevant keywords' anchor rather than full coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The C# 12+/modern-C# niche with named features (Span<T>, readonly record struct) is mostly distinct from other skills with only minor overlap risk against a generic 'coding standards' or 'refactoring' skill, sitting above the 3 anchor but below the fully-distinct 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 11 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
Aaronontheweb/dotnet-skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.