xcode-compilation-analyzer
Analyze Swift and mixed-language compile hotspots using build timing summaries and Swift frontend diagnostics, then produce a recommend-first source-level optimization plan. Use when a developer reports slow compilation, type-checking warnings, expensive clean-build compile phases, long CompileSwiftSources tasks, warn-long-function-bodies output, or wants to speed up Swift type checking.
95
93%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
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 an excellent skill description that clearly defines a narrow, well-scoped domain (Swift compilation performance analysis), lists concrete actions, and provides a comprehensive 'Use when' clause with multiple natural trigger terms. It uses proper third-person voice throughout and would be easily distinguishable from other skills in a large skill library.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Analyze Swift and mixed-language compile hotspots using build timing summaries and Swift frontend diagnostics' and 'produce a recommend-first source-level optimization plan.' These are detailed, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (analyze compile hotspots using build timing summaries and diagnostics, produce optimization plan) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when...' clause listing six distinct trigger scenarios). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms a developer would use: 'slow compilation', 'type-checking warnings', 'clean-build compile phases', 'CompileSwiftSources tasks', 'warn-long-function-bodies', 'speed up Swift type checking'. These are highly specific and natural phrases developers would actually say. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche targeting Swift compilation performance specifically. Terms like 'CompileSwiftSources', 'warn-long-function-bodies', and 'Swift frontend diagnostics' are unique enough to avoid conflicts with general coding or build skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a high-quality, expert-level skill that efficiently communicates domain-specific knowledge about Swift compilation analysis. Its strengths are excellent conciseness, highly actionable guidance with specific compiler flags and diagnostic commands, and good progressive disclosure to reference files. The main weakness is the workflow section, which while sequenced, lacks explicit validation checkpoints and error-recovery feedback loops for when diagnostics are ambiguous or recommendations don't yield expected improvements.
Suggestions
Add a validation/feedback loop to the analysis workflow, e.g., 'After applying recommendations, re-run the diagnostic script and compare timing summaries to verify improvement; if no improvement, escalate to deeper diagnostic flags.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient throughout. It avoids explaining what Xcode, Swift, or compilation are. Every section provides domain-specific knowledge that Claude wouldn't inherently know—specific compiler flags, timing categories, diagnostic thresholds, and Apple-derived patterns. No padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete compiler flags with exact syntax, a runnable diagnostic script with full argument list, specific patterns to look for (e.g., 'SwiftEmitModule time can reach 60s+'), and a clear reporting format with required fields. The Apple-Derived Checks section gives specific, actionable code-level patterns rather than vague advice. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step analysis workflow is clearly sequenced and includes a concrete diagnostic script invocation. However, it lacks explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops—there's no 'if diagnostics show X, do Y; if they show Z, do W' branching, and no verification step after recommendations are applied. For a skill involving build system analysis where misdiagnosis is possible, this is a gap. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill provides a clear overview with well-organized sections, then points to three one-level-deep reference files (code-compilation-checks.md, recommendation-format.md, build-optimization-sources.md) plus a handoff to a sibling skill. Content is appropriately split between the main skill and references. | 3 / 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.
- Commit
6bd7b59
- 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.