CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

axiom-tools

Use when asking how to use Axiom or what skills exist, capturing console with xclog, symbolicating .ips/MetricKit/.crash crashes with xcsym, driving/validating simulator UI & accessibility with xcui, or analyzing xctrace/CPU profiles with xcprof.

67

Quality

81%

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

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-organized router skill with a clear routing table, explicit priority ordering, and concrete commands, but it is padded by repetitive behavioral-enforcement rhetoric and its referenced detail files are absent from the bundle, leaving the progressive disclosure unverified.

Suggestions

Trim the EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT block and consolidate the Red Flags table; the 'check skills first' rule is stated repeatedly across The Rule, Red Flags, and Using Axiom Router Skills sections.

Include the referenced skills/*.md files (xclog-ref, xcsym-ref, xcui-ref, xcprof-ref, device-control-ref, getting-started) in the bundle so the one-level-deep progressive disclosure is actually navigable.

Replace the rhetorical enforcement lines ('This is not negotiable. This is not optional. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.') with a single concise imperative to reduce token cost without losing the routing discipline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and free of basic-concept padding, but the rhetorical enforcement block ("This is not negotiable. This is not optional. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.") and the 11-row Red Flags table restate the same 'check first' message across multiple sections, so it could be tightened — matching score-3 rather than score-4's 'minor instances'.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance — a Question→Read routing table, specific commands ("/skill axiom-concurrency", "/axiom:fix-build", "xcui resize sweep") and exact file paths — with only minor gaps because the actual tool usage lives in the referenced files, matching score-4 rather than score-5's fully copy-paste-ready coverage.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The routing workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit skill-priority ordering (Environment/Build → Architecture → Implementation) and concrete multi-domain invoke-both examples; no destructive/batch operations are present so the validation cap does not apply, placing it at score-4 rather than score-3 (which implies missing checkpoints) or score-5 (which requires explicit validation feedback loops).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-structured router with a routing table and one-level-deep inline links to skills/*.md files (the score-5 pattern), but the referenced bundle files (skills/xclog-ref.md, skills/xcsym-ref.md, etc.) and scripts/build-inlined-auditors.ts are not present in the provided bundle, so the disclosure cannot be verified against real files — dropping it to score-4 (good structure, minor organization gap).

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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, third-person description that pairs concrete per-tool actions with an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and natural keyword coverage including file extensions. Its only soft spot is the somewhat broad onboarding phrasing that mildly raises overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions tied to named tools — "capturing console with xclog", "symbolicating .ips/MetricKit/.crash crashes with xcsym", "driving/validating simulator UI & accessibility with xcui", "analyzing xctrace/CPU profiles with xcprof" — giving comprehensive coverage, matching the score-5 anchor rather than the score-4 anchor which implies minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (the four named tool actions) and when ("Use when asking how to use Axiom or what skills exist...") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the score-5 anchor; not score-4 because the when-clause is concrete and specific rather than merely adequate.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ("how to use Axiom", "what skills exist", "symbolicating .ips/MetricKit/.crash crashes") plus synonyms and file extensions (.ips, .crash), matching the comprehensive score-5 anchor rather than score-4's 'a few natural terms missing'.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The tool-specific triggers (xclog/xcsym/xcui/xcprof, .ips symbolication) are distinct, but the broad opener "how to use Axiom or what skills exist" carries minor overlap risk with general onboarding skills, placing it at score-4 (mostly distinct) rather than score-5 (clear niche, minimal conflict).

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 10 missing

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
CharlesWiltgen/Axiom
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.