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

70%

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 ./.claude-plugin/plugins/axiom/skills/axiom-design/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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-built router skill: navigation is symptom-indexed and precise to the section level, with explicit conflict-resolution ordering and an unusually useful anti-rationalization table. Its main costs are token redundancy — the same routing map appears in four formats — and references to files that live outside this bundle, which limits verifiability.

Suggestions

Collapse the Quick Reference table, dot decision graph, and numbered Decision Tree into a single routing representation — the dot graph alone duplicates the table row-for-row at roughly 40 lines' cost.

Move version-specific details ("pre-iOS 26", "the 27 SDK ignores it on OS 27") into a short compatibility note under the relevant reference instead of inline in routing rows.

Trim Example Invocations to 2–3 genuinely ambiguous cases (e.g. the design vs accessibility overlap), since it currently repeats the routing table verbatim.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The same routing map is repeated four times — the Quick Reference table, the dot decision graph, the numbered Decision Tree, and Example Invocations all encode the identical symptom-to-file mapping (e.g. the alerts routing appears in every one). Version-specific details ("pre-iOS 26", "the 27 SDK", "OS 27") are embedded inline rather than isolated in a compatibility section, so the body is mostly efficient but has a clear tightening target — below anchor 4, yet far from anchor 2 since no concept explanations pad it.

3 / 5

Actionability

Routing directives are concrete down to section level ("See `skills/sf-symbols-ref.md` (Part 11)", "`skills/hig.md` (quick answer) or `skills/hig-ref.md` (Alerts & Action Sheets, full rules)") and include environment fallbacks ("Elsewhere, search Axiom's skills for `skills/<agent>.md`"). It misses anchor 5 because the `sfsymbols` CLI and `/skill axiom-*` invocations are named without any usage example.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The routing sequence is unambiguous (symptom → reference) and Conflict Resolution supplies explicit ordering for overlapping cases ("Use design FIRST… Then use swiftui"), plus the anti-rationalization table counters common wrong turns. No validation checkpoints exist, but the skill is a read-only router so none are strictly required; it misses anchor 5 for having no verification step at all.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a pure symptom-indexed router pointing one level deep to clearly signaled files ("See `skills/hig.md`", "See `skills/liquid-glass-ref.md`"), which matches the ideal overview pattern. It falls short of anchor 5 because the referenced `skills/*.md` files are not present in this skill's bundle (no references/ or skills/ directory exists alongside SKILL.md) and several references point into sibling suites (axiom-swiftui's iphone-duo.md, axiom-media's carplay-hig.md), so the referenced paths cannot be verified within the bundle.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

A concise, well-triggered description whose 'when' clause and domain keywords are strong, but which omits any explicit statement of what the skill actually does, leaving the 'what' to be inferred from a topic list. Trigger vocabulary is natural and distinctive for the Apple design niche, missing only a few synonyms.

Suggestions

Add an explicit capability statement, e.g. "Routes Apple design decisions (HIG patterns, Liquid Glass, SF Symbols, typography, app structure) to the right reference file. Use when…" so the 'what' is stated, not inferred.

Include natural synonyms such as "Human Interface Guidelines", "iOS/macOS UI", and "icons" to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Name what the skill provides (decision trees, quick-answer tables, per-topic references) in one clause so completeness covers both 'what' and 'when'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The only stated action is "making visual or interaction design decisions"; the enumerated topics ("HIG patterns, Liquid Glass, SF Symbols, typography, app entry-point and auth-flow structure") name scope but include no capability verbs like applies, audits, or routes. This exceeds anchor 3's 'domain plus 1-2 concrete actions' in topic specificity but never lists the several concrete actions anchor 4 requires.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit ("Use when making visual or interaction design decisions for an Apple app") but the 'what' is only implied by the topic list — the description never states what the skill does. It is above anchor 2's bare 'when-only' ("Use when working with documents") because the dash clause carries real scope, but below anchor 4, which requires both 'what' and 'when' explicitly present.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"HIG", "Liquid Glass", "SF Symbols", "typography", "Apple app", and "auth-flow" are exactly the terms a user would naturally say when needing this skill. It falls short of anchor 5 because natural synonyms like "Human Interface Guidelines" spelled out, "iOS/macOS UI design", or "icons" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Apple app" plus "Liquid Glass" and "SF Symbols" carve a clear Apple-design niche unlikely to trigger for non-Apple or non-design skills. Minor overlap risk remains with closely related sibling skills (typography and auth-flow structure could also pull a SwiftUI or accessibility skill — the body itself devotes a Conflict Resolution section to this), which keeps it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

CharlesWiltgen/Axiom

Path

.claude-plugin/plugins/axiom/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.