CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

csharp-azure-spector-coverage-gaps

Discovers and implements gaps in Spector test coverage for the Azure C# HTTP client emitter. Use when asked to find missing Spector scenarios, add Spector test coverage, or implement a specific Spector spec for the Azure C# emitter. Can also compare coverage between the Azure dashboard and the Standard (TypeSpec core) dashboard.

65

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

—

The risk profile of this skill

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/csharp-azure-spector-coverage-gaps/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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 highly actionable with concrete commands, code templates, and a well-sequenced validated workflow for a complex codebase-specific task. Its main weaknesses are repeated stubbed-generation warnings that pad the token budget and a monolithic structure with no reference files to offload the long catalog listings.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated 'committed Spector libraries are stubbed' warnings into a single canonical note and reference it, removing the duplications in Step 1, Step 3, and the Notes section to improve conciseness.

Move the large existing-coverage directory tree listings (Standard and Azure test directories) and the catalog of common C# test patterns into a separate reference file (e.g., references/test-patterns.md) linked once from SKILL.md, improving progressive disclosure.

Add an explicit error-recovery feedback loop in Step 7 for when tests fail (e.g., regenerate unstubbed, re-read the scenario file, fix the assertion, re-run Test-Spector.ps1) to push workflow clarity to the top anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient domain-specific content, but the 'all committed Spector libraries are stubbed' warning is repeated across multiple sections (e.g., the Overview, Step 1, Step 3 note, and Notes) and prerequisite guidance recurs, so it could be tightened; not a 4 due to this padding.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready PowerShell commands (Generate.ps1, Test-Spector.ps1 with real filters), concrete C# test file templates, a spec-to-directory mapping table, and multiple worked test patterns covering common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 8-step process with a top-level checklist and explicit validation checkpoints ('Verify generation succeeded', 'Validate all tests pass'); not a 5 because error-recovery feedback loops (what to do when a test fails) are only implicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle/reference files exist and the ~560-line body is a single monolith; while it is well-sectioned with clear headers, large coverage-directory listings and the extensive pattern catalog are inlined rather than split into one-level-deep reference files.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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 clear, specific, and well-structured, explicitly answering both what the skill does and when to invoke it with concrete trigger phrases. It is firmly in third person and tightly scoped to a distinct niche, with only minor room for additional synonym coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Spector test coverage for the Azure C# HTTP client emitter') and several concrete actions (discover gaps, implement tests, compare dashboards), but the actions are variations of one theme rather than fully comprehensive, fitting the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly states what it does ('Discovers and implements gaps...') and when to use it ('Use when asked to find missing Spector scenarios...') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases a user would say ('find missing Spector scenarios', 'add Spector test coverage', 'implement a specific Spector spec') with good coverage; not a 5 because few synonyms or alternate phrasings are offered.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A highly specific niche (Spector coverage for the Azure C# HTTP client emitter) with distinct, specialized triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (568 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
Azure/azure-sdk-for-net
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.