scheduling-basics

Core concepts of the scheduling package — event types, schedules, bookings, hosts, teams, and how they compose.

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./packages/scheduling/docs/skills/scheduling-basics/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

80%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 an efficient, well-structured reference with concrete commands and clear mental-model definitions. Its main weakness is the lack of validation checkpoints around destructive operations like cancellations, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification step before destructive commands, e.g. confirm the booking via `list-bookings --uid ...` before running `cancel-booking --uid ...`.

Fill in the placeholder arguments in the task table (e.g. concrete `--from`/`--to` date examples) so commands are closer to copy-paste ready.

For multi-step tasks, number the steps inline so the sequence and any checkpoint are unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and dense — terse bullet definitions, a flat URL list, and a compact task table — with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place at the anchor-5 level.	5 / 5
Actionability	The Common tasks table gives concrete commands with real flags (e.g. `create-event-type --title "Intro" --slug intro --length 30`), but several use placeholders like `<slug>` and `--from ... --to ...`, leaving minor gaps that keep it just below fully copy-paste ready.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Multi-step sequences are shown (e.g. `list-bookings` then `cancel-booking`; `create-event-type` then `set-event-type-hosts`), but destructive operations like cancel-booking have no validation/verification checkpoint, so per the rubric cap workflow clarity stays at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a compact single-file skill with no external references needed, organized into clear sections (mental model, workflows, public URLs, common tasks), which meets the under-50-lines well-organized-sections criterion for a 5.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 clearly identifies a specific niche and lists concrete domain entities, but it is concept-focused rather than action-oriented and entirely omits a "Use when..." trigger clause, which caps completeness. Adding explicit trigger guidance and a few user-natural synonyms would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when working with the scheduling package — creating event types, checking availability, or managing bookings and team schedules."

Include user-natural synonyms such as "meetings", "appointments", and "calendar" alongside the package-specific terms.

Reframe at least part of the description around actions ("create event types, check availability, cancel and reschedule bookings") rather than only naming concepts.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain ("the scheduling package") and enumerates concrete entities — "event types, schedules, bookings, hosts, teams" — but describes concepts/nouns rather than actions, so it sits at the anchor-3 level of naming the domain with several concrete items without being action-oriented.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (core concepts of the scheduling package and how they compose), but there is no "Use when..." or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the rubric cap completeness stays at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant terms like "scheduling", "bookings", and "event types" appear, but common user-facing synonyms such as "meetings", "appointments", and "calendar" are missing, matching the anchor-3 case of having some relevant keywords but lacking common variations.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Core concepts of the scheduling package" carves out a clear, specific niche tied to one package with named entities, giving mostly-distinct triggers; it is not a 5 because the missing explicit trigger phrase leaves minor overlap risk with adjacent calendar/scheduling skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: BuilderIO/agent-native
Path: packages/scheduling/docs/skills/scheduling-basics/SKILL.md
Commit: bb282b1

Reviewed: ~18 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.