defi-protocol-templates
Implement DeFi protocols with production-ready templates for staking, AMMs, governance, and lending systems. Use when building decentralized finance applications or smart contract protocols.
72
57%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.26xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-wshobson/blockchain-web3/skills/defi-protocol-templates/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
85%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description that clearly communicates both what the skill does and when to use it, with specific DeFi protocol types listed. The main weakness is that trigger term coverage could be broader to capture more natural user phrasings like 'liquidity pool', 'yield farming', 'token swap', or 'Solidity'. Overall it performs well for skill selection purposes.
Suggestions
Expand trigger terms to include common variations users might say: 'liquidity pool', 'yield farming', 'token swap', 'DEX', 'DAO voting', 'Solidity', 'ERC-20'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions/domains: staking, AMMs, governance, and lending systems, plus mentions production-ready templates. These are concrete, identifiable protocol types. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (implement DeFi protocols with templates for staking, AMMs, governance, lending) and 'when' (use when building decentralized finance applications or smart contract protocols) with an explicit 'Use when' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good terms like 'DeFi', 'staking', 'AMMs', 'governance', 'lending', and 'smart contract protocols', but misses common variations users might say such as 'yield farming', 'liquidity pool', 'token swap', 'DAO', 'Solidity', or specific chain names. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | DeFi protocols with specific sub-domains (staking, AMMs, governance, lending) carve out a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with general smart contract skills or other blockchain-related skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
29%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides high-quality, executable Solidity templates but fails as a SKILL.md by inlining hundreds of lines of contract code that should live in referenced asset files. It completely lacks workflow guidance for deployment, testing, and validation — critical for smart contracts handling financial assets. The content would be significantly improved by restructuring as a concise overview pointing to the already-listed reference and asset files.
Suggestions
Move the full contract implementations to the referenced asset files (assets/staking-contract.sol, etc.) and replace them in SKILL.md with brief descriptions and key code snippets showing the most important patterns.
Add a concrete deployment and testing workflow with explicit steps: compile, test (with example Hardhat/Foundry commands), audit checklist, deploy to testnet, verify, then deploy to mainnet.
Add validation checkpoints for security-critical operations — e.g., 'Run slither analysis before deployment', 'Verify reentrancy guards on all external calls', 'Check token approval patterns'.
Remove the 'When to Use This Skill' and 'Common DeFi Patterns' sections — Claude already knows when DeFi patterns apply and what TWAP/vesting/multisig are.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is extremely verbose at ~400+ lines, mostly consisting of full contract implementations inlined directly. Claude already understands Solidity patterns like staking rewards, AMMs, and governance. The 'When to Use This Skill' section and 'Common DeFi Patterns' bullet list add little value. Most of this content belongs in reference files, not the main skill body. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The code is fully executable Solidity with proper imports, complete function implementations, events, and modifiers. Each contract is copy-paste ready with OpenZeppelin dependencies clearly specified. The flash loan example even includes a receiver implementation. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow guidance whatsoever — no deployment steps, no testing sequence, no validation checkpoints. For smart contracts handling financial assets, the absence of testing/auditing/deployment workflows is a critical gap. The 'Best Practices' section mentions testing and auditing but provides no concrete steps or commands. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a monolithic wall of code. Four complete smart contracts (~300 lines of Solidity) are inlined when they should be in the referenced asset files. The Resources section lists reference files but the main body doesn't leverage them — it dumps everything inline instead of providing an overview with pointers to detailed implementations. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust
- Commit
6e3d68c
- 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.