CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

create-status-provider

Add a new section to the agent status output (agent status command)

45

Quality

48%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/create-status-provider/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

64%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a well-structured, concise skill that clearly outlines the workflow for adding a status provider to the Datadog Agent. Its main weakness is the lack of concrete code examples or templates in the skill itself—it heavily relies on reading existing source files as references, which makes the implementation step less actionable. Adding a feedback loop for build/lint failures and including a minimal code template would significantly improve it.

Suggestions

Add a concrete Go code template showing the minimal provider struct, interface methods, and registration pattern rather than only pointing to reference files.

Add explicit error recovery in Step 5: 'If build fails, review errors, fix, and rebuild. If lint fails, fix issues and re-lint. Only report success when both pass.'

Include a minimal `.tmpl` example showing the expected template structure (plain text and HTML) so Claude doesn't have to infer the format entirely from reference files.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is lean and efficient. It assumes Claude knows Go, embedding, and general programming concepts. Every section serves a purpose—no unnecessary explanations of what status providers are conceptually or how Go modules work.

3 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete reference file paths and a specific build/lint command, but lacks executable code examples. The actual implementation step ('Create the provider implementation following the reference') is vague—it delegates to reading reference files rather than providing a concrete template or code snippet to adapt.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced and includes a verification step with build and lint commands. However, there's no feedback loop for when build or lint fails—it just says 'report the results to the user' rather than specifying fix-and-retry behavior, which is important for code generation workflows.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references specific files in the codebase as examples (good), but no bundle files are provided to support these references. The reference table is well-structured, but the skill could benefit from having key patterns extracted into bundle files rather than relying entirely on reading source code at runtime.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

32%

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 narrow and task-specific but lacks depth. It identifies a single concrete action (adding a section to agent status output) without explaining the broader capabilities, the process involved, or when Claude should select this skill. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause and limited trigger terms significantly weaken its effectiveness for skill selection.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to extend, customize, or add new sections to the agent status command output.'

Expand the description to list more specific actions or sub-tasks involved, such as 'Defines new status sections, registers them with the status renderer, and formats output for the agent status command.'

Include natural trigger term variations users might say, such as 'status display', 'status panel', 'agent dashboard', 'CLI status output', or 'extend status command'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names a specific action ('Add a new section') and a specific domain ('agent status output'), but describes only one action and lacks detail about what kind of sections or what the process involves.

2 / 3

Completeness

It partially answers 'what' (add a section to agent status output) but has no explicit 'when' clause or trigger guidance. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also quite thin, warranting a score of 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms like 'agent status' and 'agent status command' that a user might reference, but misses variations and broader natural language triggers users might use (e.g., 'status display', 'status panel', 'dashboard section').

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The mention of 'agent status output' and 'agent status command' provides some specificity to a particular feature, but without more context it could overlap with other skills related to agent configuration, CLI commands, or status displays.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

9

/

11

Passed

Repository
DataDog/datadog-agent
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.