raffle-winner-picker

Picks random winners from lists, spreadsheets, or Google Sheets for giveaways, raffles, and contests. Ensures fair, unbiased selection with transparency.

Quality

59%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./raffle-winner-picker/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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 actionable with concrete prompt examples and clear scenario workflows, but it is padded with redundant sections and lacks explicit validation checkpoints in its batch selection workflows.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation step to each numbered workflow (e.g. 'Verify winner eligibility before announcing') so batch selection workflows clear the validation cap.

Consolidate the overlapping 'When to Use This Skill', 'Features', and 'Common Use Cases' sections into a single list to remove redundancy.

Drop the 'Inspired by Lenny's use case' line and other non-essential commentary to tighten token efficiency.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly example-driven and free of basic-concept padding, but redundant sections ('When to Use This Skill', 'What This Skill Does', 'Features', 'Common Use Cases') overlap heavily and the 'Inspired by Lenny' line is fluff that could be trimmed.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready user prompts for the common cases (Google Sheets, local file, list, multiple winners, exclusions, weighted, runner-ups); falls short of 5 because the example output is illustrative rather than a complete executable spec.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Numbered example workflows exist for each scenario, but the selection-from-a-list batch operation has no explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow steps; the rubric caps batch operations without validation at 3 even though eligibility checks appear only in the Tips section.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-headed sections give it structure, but the file is a self-contained ~159-line document with duplicated use-case material that could be consolidated; no external references are used or needed, so it sits at the 'could be better organized' anchor rather than the well-split 4/5 anchors.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 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 is specific and uses natural trigger terms for a well-defined niche, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness and keeps distinctiveness just below the top anchor.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when picking raffle or giveaway winners from a list, spreadsheet, or Google Sheet.'

Mention concrete file formats (.csv, .xlsx) alongside 'lists, spreadsheets, or Google Sheets' to broaden trigger coverage.

Name one or two additional concrete actions (e.g. 'pick one or multiple winners, exclude prior winners, weight entries') to lift specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and one concrete core action ('Picks random winners') across several input sources (lists, spreadsheets, Google Sheets), plus a quality claim ('Ensures fair, unbiased selection with transparency'), but does not enumerate multiple distinct capabilities — not comprehensive enough for 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear 'what' but the 'when' is only a weak purpose clause ('for giveaways, raffles, and contests') with no explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Strong natural keyword coverage ('winners', 'giveaways', 'raffles', 'contests', 'lists', 'spreadsheets', 'Google Sheets') that users would actually say, but lacks file-extension variants (.csv, .xlsx) that would push it to 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (random winner selection for giveaways/raffles/contests) with distinct triggers and low overlap risk; falls short of 5 only because it lacks an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: ComposioHQ/awesome-claude-skills
Path: raffle-winner-picker/SKILL.md
Commit: be2a406

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.