CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

axiom-design

Use when making visual or interaction design decisions for an Apple app — HIG patterns, Liquid Glass, SF Symbols, typography, app entry-point and auth-flow structure.

Quality

62%

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-cursor/skills/axiom-design/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 effective, well-signaled router with concrete per-task file routing and explicit conflict-resolution rules between sibling skills. Its main weakness is redundancy — the routing table is restated four times in different formats — plus a stub subagent-delegation section and references that cannot be verified against the bundle.

Suggestions

Collapse the dot-graph decision tree, the numbered decision list, and the Example Invocations into the single Quick Reference table — the routing mapping currently appears four times and could roughly halve the file.

Cut or populate the "Cursor Subagent Routing" section: it instructs delegation to "the appropriate Cursor subagent" but names none except liquid-glass-auditor, which already appears in the decision tree.

Trim "Critical Patterns" to one-line summaries or fold it into the Quick Reference, since it restates the scope of each reference file the table already routes to.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The same task-to-reference routing is repeated four times — Quick Reference table, dot-graph decision tree, numbered decision list, and Example Invocations — and "Critical Patterns" re-summarizes the same files again, so the ~185-line body carries several redundant/padded sections. It avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows (better than anchor 1), but the duplication goes beyond anchor 3's "could be tightened".

2 / 5

Actionability

Routing is concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill: each symptom maps to a specific file ("See skills/hig.md", "skills/sf-symbols-ref.md (Part 11)", "/skill axiom-swiftui"), and Example Invocations map real user phrasings to files. Gaps: the "Cursor Subagent Routing" section delegates to unnamed subagents (only liquid-glass-auditor is ever named), keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The numbered decision tree with sub-steps (1a, 2b, 3a) plus the Conflict Resolution section gives a clear, mostly unambiguous routing sequence with explicit precedence rules between overlapping skills. No destructive or batch operations apply, so no validation cap; the underspecified subagent-delegation path is the minor gap versus anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a proper overview pointing to one-level-deep, clearly signaled references ("See skills/liquid-glass.md"), which is the right structure. However, none of the referenced skills/*.md files exist in the provided bundle, and reference styles are inconsistent (file paths, "/skill" invocations, named suites like "axiom-payments"), so navigation is not fully verifiable — anchor 4's "minor organization gaps" rather than anchor 5's "easy navigation".

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

47%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 well-targeted at the Apple design domain with strong natural trigger terms, but it is a pure "Use when" clause. It never states what the skill provides (decision trees, color/typography guidance, references), which caps both completeness and specificity low.

Suggestions

Add a "what" clause before the trigger, e.g. "Provides HIG-based decision trees, semantic-color and typography guidance, and SF Symbols/Liquid Glass references for Apple app design. Use when..." — this would lift both completeness and specificity.

State at least 2-3 concrete actions the skill performs (e.g. "selects semantic colors", "picks SF Symbol rendering modes", "structures auth flows") rather than only listing topic areas.

Include the spelled-out trigger "Human Interface Guidelines" alongside HIG, and add common natural terms like "colors" and "dark mode" to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete domains ("HIG patterns, Liquid Glass, SF Symbols, typography, app entry-point and auth-flow structure") but states no actions at all — nothing describes what the skill actually does with those domains. It is not entirely vague (anchor 1) because the topics are specific, but it falls well short of anchor 3's "1-2 concrete actions".

2 / 5

Completeness

Only the "when" is present ("Use when making visual or interaction design decisions for an Apple app") with no "what" — anchor 2 explicitly covers "only 'when' is present without 'what'". Scoring only what is stated, no capability can be inferred to reach anchor 3's clear "what".

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"visual design", "interaction design", "HIG", "Liquid Glass", "SF Symbols", and "auth-flow" are natural phrases an Apple developer would say. A few natural terms are missing — the spelled-out "Human Interface Guidelines", "colors", and "dark mode" — so it stops short of anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Apple-specific triggers (Liquid Glass, SF Symbols, HIG) carve a clear niche with minimal conflict against generic skills. Minor overlap risk remains with closely related sibling skills (swiftui, accessibility, media/CarPlay), which the body's own Conflict Resolution section has to arbitrate — that keeps it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

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-cursor/skills/axiom-design/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.