blazemeter-usage-billing
Guide for BlazeMeter Usage & Billing, including credit types and charging. Use when working with usage and billing for (1) Understanding BlazeMeter credit types (VU, VUH, Tests), (2) Calculating credit consumption for different test types, or any other usage and billing tasks.
56
62%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./resources/skills/blazemeter-usage-billing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%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 a solid description that clearly identifies its niche (BlazeMeter billing and usage), includes explicit trigger guidance with a 'Use when' clause, and uses domain-specific terminology that reduces conflict risk. The main weakness is that the specificity of concrete actions could be stronger—it mostly describes understanding and calculating rather than listing more granular capabilities.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (BlazeMeter usage & billing) and some specific actions like understanding credit types (VU, VUH, Tests) and calculating credit consumption, but it's not comprehensive—it doesn't list many concrete actions beyond understanding and calculating. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (guide for BlazeMeter usage & billing, credit types and charging) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when working with usage and billing for...' clause with specific trigger scenarios). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'BlazeMeter', 'usage', 'billing', 'credit types', 'VU', 'VUH', 'Tests', 'credit consumption', 'test types'. These are terms a user working with BlazeMeter billing would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly specific to BlazeMeter usage and billing with distinct terms like VU, VUH, and credit consumption. Unlikely to conflict with other skills given the narrow, product-specific domain. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is verbose and lacks substantive content in the main body. It spends most of its tokens on vague descriptions and restating obvious information rather than providing concrete, actionable guidance. The core domain knowledge (credit types, consumption calculations) is entirely deferred to a reference file, leaving the SKILL.md as mostly filler with a thin MCP tool reference.
Suggestions
Remove the verbose Overview and Quick Start sections; replace with a concise summary table of credit types (VU, VUH, Tests) and their charging models directly in the SKILL.md body.
Provide a concrete, executable MCP tool invocation example with actual parameters and expected response structure, rather than the vague 3-step workflow description.
Add a brief inline reference of credit consumption formulas or key facts so the skill is useful without requiring the reader to open credits.md for basic questions.
Cut the 'When to Use MCP Tools' section entirely — Claude doesn't need to be told when programmatic access or automation is useful.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is padded with unnecessary filler. Sections like 'Overview', 'Quick Start', and 'When to Use MCP Tools' largely restate obvious information or describe concepts Claude already knows. The 'Quick Start' is just a list of vague goals, not actionable steps. Much of the content could be cut without losing value. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The MCP tool section provides some concrete guidance (tool name, action, required args), but there's no executable example with actual parameters or expected output. The 'Example Workflow' is just a vague 3-step description rather than a concrete, copy-paste-ready invocation. The core domain knowledge (credit types, charging models) is entirely deferred to a reference file. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The example workflow lists steps but they are vague ('Extract billing usage information from the workspace response') with no validation checkpoints or error handling. For a billing/usage skill, there's no guidance on what to do if data is unexpected or how to verify correctness of consumption calculations. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is a reference to credits.md which is appropriate, but no bundle files were provided to verify the reference exists. The SKILL.md itself contains too much filler content inline (the overview, quick start, and 'when to use' sections) that adds little value, while the actual substantive content (credit types, charging models) is entirely in the reference file, making the main skill feel hollow. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 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
- Blazemeter/bzm-mcp
- Commit
b76b703
- 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.