CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

data-programs

Save a run-code fetch/join/aggregate script as a stored, refreshable data source any app's own charts/tables can render, instead of a hardcoded provider action or a per-view re-fetch. Use when an ad-hoc run-code or provider-api-request analysis should become a live, cached data source other users or panels can reuse.

66

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/data-programs/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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.

A well-structured, actionable body with concrete API signatures, an explicit dry-run validation checkpoint, and clean sectioning. Adding a complete runnable example and tightening the motivational prose would lift the lower dimensions.

Suggestions

Include one complete copy-paste-ready data program script (with providerFetch + emit) so the actionability dimension reaches fully executable coverage.

Trim the 'Why this exists' paragraph to a sentence or two to reduce motivational over-explanation and improve token efficiency.

Make the dry-run rejection recovery loop explicit (e.g., 'on structured error, fix the code and re-save') so the workflow's feedback loop is spelled out rather than implied.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes Claude's JS competence with no basic-concept padding and token-efficient tables, but the 'Why this exists' paragraph is mild motivational over-explanation that could be trimmed, matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete action signatures like 'save-data-program({ name, title, description, code, defaultParams?, ... })' and 'emit(rows, schema?)' with return shapes are given, but no complete copy-paste runnable program script is provided, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step authoring sequence includes an explicit validation checkpoint ('dry-runs the code with defaultParams before persisting and rejects the save with a structured error'), so the destructive-cap does not apply, but the fix-and-retry loop is implied rather than spelled out, matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized with clear headers and one-level 'Related skills' pointers and no nested references, but the body exceeds 50 lines so the simple-skill 5 exception does not apply, fitting anchor 4.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong, specific description with an explicit what-and-when structure and concrete trigger phrases. Minor gains are available from broader trigger synonyms and sharper separation from the underlying run-code skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — 'fetch/join/aggregate script', 'stored, refreshable data source', 'charts/tables can render' — but they orbit one core save-as-data-source operation rather than comprehensive standalone actions, matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers 'what' ('Save a run-code fetch/join/aggregate script as a stored, refreshable data source...') and 'when' via a concrete 'Use when an ad-hoc run-code or provider-api-request analysis should become a live, cached data source...' clause, matching anchor 5.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like 'run-code', 'provider-api-request', 'ad-hoc analysis', 'live, cached data source', and 'panels' give good coverage, though a few common synonyms are missing, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The data-program niche is clear and distinct, but 'run-code' / 'provider-api-request' framing carries minor overlap risk with the closely related run-code/actions skill, so anchor 4 fits better than 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
BuilderIO/agent-native
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.