bash-pro
Master of defensive Bash scripting for production automation, CI/CD pipelines, and system utilities. Expert in safe, portable, and testable shell scripts.
36
22%
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/bash-pro/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%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 description relies heavily on self-promotional language ('Master of', 'Expert in') rather than concrete capabilities. It fails to specify what actions the skill performs or when Claude should select it. The description would benefit from listing specific operations and adding explicit trigger conditions.
Suggestions
Replace vague claims with specific actions: 'Write defensive Bash scripts with error handling, create CI/CD pipeline scripts, build portable shell utilities' instead of 'Master of defensive Bash scripting'.
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause: 'Use when the user asks for shell scripts, .sh files, Bash automation, cron jobs, or CI/CD pipeline scripts'.
Include more natural trigger terms users would say: 'bash script', '.sh', 'shell command', 'cron', 'deployment script', 'build script'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Uses vague, abstract language like 'Master of' and 'Expert in' without listing concrete actions. No specific capabilities are described - only broad domains like 'production automation' and 'CI/CD pipelines'. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Partially addresses 'what' at a high level but completely lacks any 'when' guidance. No 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance exists. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords users might say ('Bash', 'CI/CD', 'shell scripts', 'automation') but missing common variations like 'bash script', '.sh files', 'cron jobs', 'deployment scripts', or specific commands. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Mentions Bash specifically which helps distinguish from general coding skills, but 'automation', 'CI/CD', and 'system utilities' are broad enough to overlap with DevOps, Python scripting, or infrastructure skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill suffers from severe verbosity, presenting encyclopedic coverage of Bash scripting concepts that Claude already knows rather than focusing on project-specific patterns or novel guidance. The content reads like a comprehensive reference manual rather than actionable skill instructions, with abstract workflows and minimal executable examples for the core tasks.
Suggestions
Reduce content by 70-80% by removing explanations of concepts Claude knows (quoting variables, using local, preferring printf) and keeping only project-specific patterns or non-obvious guidance
Replace the abstract 4-step workflow with a concrete example showing a complete script from input validation through testing, with explicit validation checkpoints
Move the extensive best practices lists to the referenced sub-skills and keep only a concise quick-start section with 2-3 executable template examples
Add a concrete 'Script Template' section with a copy-paste ready skeleton that demonstrates the key patterns (strict mode, argument parsing, cleanup traps) in one executable example
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is extremely verbose with extensive lists of best practices, features, and guidelines that Claude already knows. Many sections like 'Readability & Maintainability' and 'Performance Optimization' explain basic programming concepts that don't need explicit instruction. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | While there are some concrete code snippets (strict mode, script directory detection, NUL-safe patterns), most content is descriptive bullet points rather than executable examples. The 'Instructions' section is vague with only 4 high-level steps lacking concrete implementation. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-step instruction workflow is too abstract ('Apply strict mode and safe argument parsing') without concrete validation checkpoints. For a skill involving potentially destructive operations (automation, CI/CD), there are no explicit feedback loops or verification steps. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill does reference sub-skills at the end for detailed topics, which is good structure. However, the main file is a monolithic wall of text with extensive inline content that should be in those sub-skills instead of duplicated here. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 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.