example

Hermetic contract-validation fixture.

Quality

26%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./tests/fixtures/contracts/valid/skills/example/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

45%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 content is maximally lean but provides no executable guidance, workflow, or steps — which is appropriate only because the fixture intentionally has no runtime behavior. Conciseness and progressive disclosure score well; actionability and workflow clarity are minimal.

Suggestions

If the skill is genuinely a no-op fixture, note explicitly that there is nothing to execute so Claude does not search for missing instructions.

If any runtime behavior is intended, add a concrete example or command sequence.

Clarify the intended workflow, even if it is a single self-describing step.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is two short sentences with no padding or over-explanation; every token earns its place and it assumes Claude's competence.	5 / 5
Actionability	It only describes the fixture ('deliberately has no runtime behavior') with no concrete code, commands, or executable guidance whatsoever.	1 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is no sequence of steps and no process to follow; the body explicitly states there is no runtime behavior.	1 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	For a sub-50-line simple skill with no external references, the single clearly organized section satisfies the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure.	5 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

8%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 terse and uses technical jargon rather than natural trigger language, providing only a minimal 'what' and no 'when' guidance. It would be hard for a user or Claude to know when to invoke this skill.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when ...' clause stating concrete trigger conditions for when the skill applies.

Replace jargon ('Hermetic', 'fixture') with natural keywords users would actually say (e.g., 'contract validation', 'API contract checks').

Enumerate one or more concrete actions the skill performs so the 'what' is unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase 'Hermetic contract-validation fixture' names the domain but offers only a single, minimal action (validation); no concrete capabilities are enumerated.	2 / 5
Completeness	It states a vague 'what' (a validation fixture) with no 'Use when...' trigger guidance, so neither component is explicitly and adequately answered.	1 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'Hermetic contract-validation fixture' contains technical jargon with no natural keywords a user would say when they need this skill; the only loosely natural term is 'contract'.	1 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is very broad/abstract ('contract-validation') with high overlap risk against general validation or contract-testing skills and no distinctive triggers.	2 / 5
	Total	6 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: AgriciDaniel/claude-obsidian
Path: tests/fixtures/contracts/valid/skills/example/SKILL.md
Commit: ad67087

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.