code-completion-semantic-constraints
Automatically complete partial code snippets while satisfying semantic constraints including variable types, invariants, pre/post-conditions, interface contracts, and expected input/output behavior. Use when users provide incomplete code with specific requirements like "complete this function that takes a list and returns sorted unique elements" or "fill in this method body that must maintain the invariant that x stays positive" or "implement this interface method with these type constraints." Produces compilable, executable code with tests and a constraint satisfaction report.
87
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
95%
1.02xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
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 an excellent skill description that clearly articulates a specific capability (constraint-aware code completion), provides natural trigger phrases through concrete examples, and explicitly states when to use it. The description uses proper third-person voice and distinguishes itself from generic code assistance through its focus on semantic constraints and formal verification concepts.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'complete partial code snippets', 'satisfying semantic constraints including variable types, invariants, pre/post-conditions, interface contracts, and expected input/output behavior', and 'Produces compilable, executable code with tests and a constraint satisfaction report.' | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (complete code snippets satisfying semantic constraints, produce compilable code with tests) AND when (explicit 'Use when' clause with three concrete example scenarios users might describe). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural phrases users would say: 'complete this function', 'fill in this method body', 'implement this interface method', 'type constraints', 'invariant', 'sorted unique elements'. These match how developers naturally describe code completion tasks. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive focus on constraint-based code completion with semantic requirements like invariants, pre/post-conditions, and interface contracts. This niche differentiates it from general code generation or simple autocomplete skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a solid workflow structure with clear sequencing and validation steps, but falls short on actionability by describing outputs rather than showing complete executable examples. The content is moderately concise but could be tightened, and the examples would be significantly more useful if they showed actual completed code rather than descriptions of what the output should contain.
Suggestions
Replace example output descriptions with actual completed code implementations (e.g., show the full `process_items` function, not just 'Output: Completed function with sorting logic')
Show a complete constraint satisfaction report example with actual content rather than describing what it should contain
Condense the constraint categorization list - Claude understands these concepts and doesn't need detailed explanations of what type constraints or invariants are
Consider splitting detailed examples into a separate EXAMPLES.md file to keep the main skill focused on the workflow
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary elaboration. The constraint categorization list and workflow steps could be more condensed, and some explanations (like 'Fully compilable and executable') repeat information already stated. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Examples describe expected outputs rather than showing actual completed code. The workflow provides clear steps but lacks executable code snippets - examples say 'Output: Completed function with...' instead of showing the actual implementation. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation (step 4 generates verification tests). Step 2 includes a feedback loop for clarification when constraints conflict. The process is logical and includes appropriate checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but everything is in a single file. For a skill of this complexity, the detailed examples and language-specific guidance could be split into separate reference files to keep the main skill leaner. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.
- Repository
- ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE
- Commit
0f00a4f
- 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.