CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

arn-spark-static-prototype

This skill should be used when the user says "static prototype", "arn static prototype", "visual validation", "pixel perfect", "component showcase", "static screens", "build a static prototype", "create a component showcase", "visual review", "validate the visuals", "check the design", "validate components", "review the design visuals", or wants to create a static component showcase and validate it through iterative expert review cycles with per-criterion scoring, an independent judge verdict, and versioned output.

74

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The content is highly actionable with a clearly sequenced, validation-rich workflow and exemplary progressive disclosure via three well-signaled one-level-deep references. Its main weakness is conciseness: an Agent Invocation Guide table and an Error Handling section substantially duplicate guidance already present inline in the workflow steps.

Suggestions

Remove or shrink the Agent Invocation Guide table (lines 331–343), since each row restates Steps 4a–5b that are already detailed in the Workflow section; a one-line pointer back to the relevant step would suffice.

Consolidate the Error Handling section so each failure mode (e.g., Playwright unavailable, builder failure, missing manifest) is documented once rather than repeated inline in the workflow and again in the summary, or mark the inline mentions as the canonical location.

Tighten the Fresh design assets prerequisite (lines 53–73), which spends ~20 lines on two near-identical AskUserQuestion branches that could be merged into a single decision flow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~350-line body is tight procedural content with no concept-explanation filler, but the Agent Invocation Guide table and Error Handling section restate steps and failure modes already covered inline in the workflow (e.g., Playwright-unavailable appears four times), so it is mostly efficient rather than lean where every token earns its place.

2 / 3

Actionability

Gives fully executable guidance throughout — exact file paths, named agents with Task-tool model parameters, copy-paste AskUserQuestion prompts with enumerated options, report table templates, and image naming conventions — leaving no ambiguity about what to do at each step.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The eight-step process (with 4a–4d sub-steps) is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (threshold checks, all-pass short-circuit, judge PASS/FAIL branching) and feedback loops that feed failing criteria into the next build cycle.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Three real reference files (criteria template, review-report template, showcase capture guide) are each loaded at a clearly signaled, specific workflow step via blockquote Read callouts, are one level deep with no nested reference chains, and correctly externalize heavy templates that would otherwise bloat the body.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 excellent: it states concrete capabilities, provides a broad set of natural trigger phrases, answers both what and when explicitly, and carves out a distinct niche with low conflict risk. It uses third-person voice throughout, so no voice penalty applies.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — "create a static component showcase", "validate it through iterative expert review cycles", "per-criterion scoring", "independent judge verdict", "versioned output" — matching the anchor that lists several specific concrete actions rather than just a domain.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (showcase creation plus iterative validation with scoring, judge verdict, versioned output) and when ("This skill should be used when the user says..."), so it has the explicit trigger guidance that would otherwise cap completeness at 2.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Lists an extensive set of natural phrases a user would actually say ("static prototype", "pixel perfect", "component showcase", "visual review", "validate the visuals", "check the design"), giving strong coverage rather than missing common variations.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear static-prototype niche with distinct triggers and an explicit handoff to the sibling clickable-prototype skill, so it is unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill despite a couple of broad terms like "check the design".

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
AppsVortex/arness
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.