agent-coding-standards
Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development.
47
35%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agent/skills/agent-coding-standards/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
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 identifies its technology domain but relies heavily on vague terms like 'best practices' and 'patterns' without concrete actions. The critical weakness is the complete absence of explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over other coding-related skills.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when reviewing code style, enforcing conventions, or asking about TypeScript/React best practices'
Replace vague terms with specific actions: instead of 'best practices and patterns', list concrete capabilities like 'enforce naming conventions, apply consistent formatting, structure components'
Include natural user phrases as triggers: 'code review', 'style guide', 'how should I structure', 'naming conventions', 'linting'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (coding standards) and technologies (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js), but uses vague terms like 'best practices' and 'patterns' without listing concrete actions like 'enforce naming conventions' or 'apply linting rules'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what (coding standards/best practices) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant technology keywords (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) that users might mention, but lacks natural trigger phrases users would say like 'code review', 'style guide', 'formatting', or 'conventions'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The technology stack provides some specificity, but 'coding standards' and 'best practices' are generic enough to potentially conflict with other development-related skills covering the same languages. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially an empty index page - it provides no actionable content in the main file, relying entirely on 29 sub-skills without any guidance on how to use them. While the concise approach is good, the complete absence of any concrete guidance, examples, or workflow makes this skill body nearly useless on its own. The sub-skill organization is poorly structured with inconsistent naming and no categorization.
Suggestions
Add a brief 'Quick Reference' section with the 3-5 most critical standards and concrete examples directly in the main skill file
Group the 29 sub-skills into logical categories (e.g., 'Naming Conventions', 'React Patterns', 'Testing', 'Code Smells') with brief descriptions of each category
Add a 'When to Apply' section explaining how Claude should use these standards during code review vs. new development vs. refactoring
Include at least one concrete, executable code example demonstrating a key pattern (e.g., the immutability pattern marked as CRITICAL)
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is extremely lean - just a title, brief description, and a list of links to sub-skills. No unnecessary explanation or padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill body contains zero actionable content - no code examples, no concrete guidance, no executable instructions. It's purely a table of contents with no substance in the main file. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow described. The numbered list appears to be arbitrary ordering rather than a sequence of steps. No guidance on when or how to apply these standards. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | While it does link to sub-skills (good structure), the links lack any context about what each contains or when to use them. The numbering is inconsistent (some have numbers, some don't), and there's no categorization or signaling to help navigate 29 sub-skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- Dokhacgiakhoa/antigravity-ide
- Commit
332e58b
- 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.