CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

axiom-audit-core-data

Use when the user mentions Core Data review, schema migration, production crashes, or data safety checking.

Quality

78%

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 ./axiom-codex/skills/axiom-audit-core-data/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%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 a highly actionable, well-sequenced audit procedure with explicit verification checkpoints and concrete search/fix guidance throughout. Its main weaknesses are the absence of any progressive disclosure (everything is inline in a long file) and trimmable sections like the invocation examples.

Suggestions

Move the Phase 2 anti-pattern catalog and Phase 4 compound-findings table into reference files (e.g. references/anti-patterns.md, references/compound-findings.md), keeping SKILL.md as an overview with clearly signaled links

Cut the 'Invocation Examples' and 'Scope' sections — that trigger guidance belongs in the frontmatter description, not the body

Trim the 'Tool Use Is Mandatory' section to a single directive line, since its points repeat across phases

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Core sections are dense with operational content (grep patterns, fixes, tables) and assume Core Data knowledge, but the 'Invocation Examples' section, the 'Scope' section repeating the description, and repeated tool-use directives are padding that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides exact grep strings ('NSMigratePersistentStoresAutomaticallyOption', 'relationshipKeyPathsForPrefetching'), copy-paste-ready Swift fix examples, a complete output template, a health-score rubric, and a false-positive list — fully executable guidance covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five phases are explicitly sequenced with validation gates ('use Read to verify the surrounding context before reporting', 'Require evidence from the Phase 1 map', present the architecture map before proceeding) plus false-positive and output-limit checklists; the destructive-operation cap does not apply since this is a read-only audit.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The ~280-line body is well-sectioned and its 'Related' pointers are clear one-level references, but the full anti-pattern catalog, compound-findings table, and invocation examples are all inlined with no reference files to split into, which a skill this long should use.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 has strong, natural trigger phrasing for a well-defined Core Data niche, but it is a trigger-only sentence that never explicitly states what the skill does. Adding a leading capability clause ('Audits Core Data code for...') and a few more synonyms would lift it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'what' clause before the trigger, e.g. 'Audits Core Data code for schema-migration risks, thread-confinement violations, N+1 queries, and data-loss patterns. Use when...'

Include common user synonyms and API names such as 'CoreData', 'data loss', 'persistent container', or 'thread safety' in the trigger list

State the outcome (prevents production crashes and permanent data loss) so the description communicates both capability and value

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Core Data review') and concrete topics ('schema migration, production crashes, or data safety checking') but never states specific capabilities the skill performs, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the several-specific-actions level of 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description is entirely a 'Use when...' trigger clause; the 'what' (auditing Core Data code for safety violations) is only weakly implied by the topic list, so it sits above the only-'when' anchor (2) but below the explicit what-plus-when anchor (4).

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Core Data review', 'schema migration', 'production crashes', and 'data safety checking' are phrases users would naturally say, but common variations like 'CoreData', 'data loss', 'thread safety', or specific API names are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Core Data' carves out a clear niche, but 'schema migration' and 'production crashes' could overlap with general code-review or concurrency-auditing skills, giving minor overlap risk with closely related skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

CharlesWiltgen/Axiom

Path

axiom-codex/skills/axiom-audit-core-data/SKILL.md

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.