CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

multiline-description

This is a multiline description. It spans multiple lines. And should be normalized.

37

Quality

33%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./legacy_pi_mono_code/pi-mono/packages/coding-agent/test/fixtures/skills/multiline-description/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is multiline-description in Kiz8-Team/pi-cwl

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.

The body is appropriately concise and clearly single-purpose, but it only declares what is tested without giving an executable method or verification step. Adding a concrete check would lift actionability and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add a concrete, executable check (e.g., a one-line assertion or command) that confirms a multiline description was normalized to a single line.

Include an explicit validation step so the single-action workflow has a clear pass/fail checkpoint.

Optionally show a short before/after example of the normalized output to make the action copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body ('This skill tests that multiline YAML descriptions are normalized to single lines.') is lean and assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place with no padding or over-explanation, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

It states a single high-level action ('tests that ... are normalized') but gives no concrete steps, command, or code to perform or verify the test, fitting 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute' more than the purely vague anchor.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The single action is unambiguous and the skill is single-purpose, but there is no explicit validation/checkpoint confirming the normalization occurred, so it sits above the 'sequence present but checkpoints missing' anchor yet below the explicit-validation anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with a clear heading and no external references needed, the content is well-organized and appropriately self-contained; minor structural thinness keeps it just below the 'clear overview with well-signaled references' top anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

0%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 placeholder meta-text that fails to convey any capability or trigger; it scores at the floor on every dimension. It should be replaced with a concrete, third-person statement of what the skill does and when to use it.

Suggestions

State the concrete capability in third person (e.g., 'Normalizes multiline YAML description fields into single-line strings').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause naming the natural terms a user would say (e.g., 'Use when authoring or linting SKILL.md frontmatter').

Remove the self-referential phrasing ('This is a multiline description...') which conveys no skill behavior.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description ('This is a multiline description. It spans multiple lines. And should be normalized.') names no domain and no concrete actions; it is pure abstract meta-language about the description itself, matching the 'entirely vague; no concrete actions' anchor.

1 / 5

Completeness

Neither 'what does this do' (no capability stated) nor 'when should Claude use it' (no trigger guidance) is present; the text describes the description format rather than a skill, matching 'missing both what and when'.

1 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

There are no natural keywords a user would say to invoke this skill; the text contains only generic meta phrasing with no domain terms or synonyms, matching the 'no natural keywords' anchor.

1 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The text is entirely generic and unrelated to any capability niche, so it is indistinguishable from and would conflict with virtually any other skill.

1 / 5

Total

4

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust
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.