CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

diff-cost-projection

Analyze code diffs for infrastructure cost impact using CloudZero spend data. Detects Terraform, CDK, CloudFormation, SAM, K8s, scaling, and application code changes that affect cloud spending.

64

Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/cost-analyst/skills/diff-cost-projection/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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 content is a well-sequenced, actionable seven-phase workflow with explicit early-exit checkpoints and clean progressive-disclosure structure. Main gaps are a missing Python math template for the core cost synthesis and referenced bundle files that are not actually present to verify.

Suggestions

Provide a small executable Python template (using only stdlib statistics/math/decimal per the security rule) for the cost-synthesis math so the core output is copy-paste ready, not just described.

Ship the referenced files under references/ (cost-impact-taxonomy.md, service-mapping.md, dimensions-reference.md, best-practices.md, cost-impact-output-examples.md, etc.) so the one-level-deep disclosures are actually present and navigable.

Tighten Phase 6 and the Skill-Specific Best Practices section to remove restated guidance and push conciseness toward fully lean.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly procedural and concrete with little explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but Phase 6 estimation prose and the Skill-Specific Best Practices section could be trimmed — efficient with minor over-explanation, a 4 rather than a perfectly lean 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready git diff commands and concrete CloudZero API call signatures with parameters cover the common cases, but the core cost-synthesis math is left to be computed in code with no Python template provided, leaving a minor gap — a 4.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Seven phases are sequenced with explicit goals and validation checkpoints (empty diff → stop; all-skip → stop; no-signals → stop) plus an error-recovery feedback loop for failed queries, matching the 5 anchor; no destructive/batch cap applies since the skill is read-only analysis.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-signaled overview delegating detail to one-level-deep references (taxonomy, service-mapping, output examples) via inline "Read the reference" callouts and a See Also nav section, but the referenced files are absent from the bundle, so the disclosed content cannot be verified present — good structure with a minor verification gap, a 4.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 specific and well-differentiated with strong keyword coverage, but it omits an explicit "Use when…" trigger clause, capping completeness. Moving the natural trigger phrases from the body into the description would raise the trigger-term and completeness scores.

Suggestions

Add a "Use when…" clause naming natural user triggers (e.g., "Use when the user asks about the cost impact of changes, or before merging infrastructure/application code that may affect cloud spend").

Fold one or two of the natural phrases from the body ("Will this branch increase our cloud spend?", "Estimate cost impact of my changes") into the description so trigger-term quality reaches comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Analyze code diffs for infrastructure cost impact" and "Detects Terraform, CDK, CloudFormation, SAM, K8s, scaling, and application code changes" list multiple concrete actions with comprehensive coverage of the IaC/app-code surface, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (analyze diffs for cost impact via CloudZero), but there is no "Use when…" clause or equivalent trigger guidance in the description; per the rubric guideline, a missing "Use when" caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong technical keyword coverage ("code diffs", "infrastructure cost impact", "cloud spending", Terraform/CDK/CloudFormation/SAM/K8s) but the natural user phrases ("cost impact of my changes", "will this increase cloud spend") live in the body, not the description, leaving a few natural terms missing — a 4, not a 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The CloudZero-backed cost-impact-on-diffs niche is distinct with specific triggers (named IaC tools + spend data), giving minimal conflict risk with other skills — a clear 5.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
Cloudzero/cloudzero-claude-marketplace
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.