CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

web-design-guidelines

Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".

64

Quality

75%

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 ./.agents/skills/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is pleaseai/web-design

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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.

A lean, well-structured wrapper skill that appropriately delegates the rule catalog to a fetched external source and keeps the SKILL.md body minimal. Its weaknesses are a fully duplicated step list across two sections and the absence of any handling for fetch failure or an output-format example.

Suggestions

Merge the duplicated four-step lists in "How It Works" and "Usage" into a single workflow section to remove the redundancy penalized in conciseness.

Add a fallback for fetch failure (e.g., retry once, then inform the user the guidelines are unavailable rather than proceeding without rules), which would also strengthen workflow checkpoints.

Include a one-line example of the expected `file:line` finding format so the output contract is concrete without fetching the guidelines first.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body has no concept over-explanation, but the "How It Works" steps ("Fetch the latest guidelines... Read the specified files... Check against all rules... Output findings") are repeated almost verbatim in the "Usage" section ("Fetch guidelines... Read the specified files... Apply all rules... Output findings"), a full duplicated section that should be collapsed into one. This matches the "mostly efficient but could be tightened" anchor rather than the minor-trim anchor 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

The skill supplies a copy-paste-ready URL, names the exact tool ("Use WebFetch to retrieve the latest rules"), specifies a concrete output contract ("the terse `file:line` format"), and defines a fallback ("If no files specified, ask the user"), which is mostly executable guidance. It does not reach anchor 5 because no example of the expected output format is shown and per-rule application is left abstract to the fetched content.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The steps are numbered, clearly sequenced (fetch → read → check → output), and include a fallback for missing arguments, matching anchor 4's "clear sequence with most checkpoints present, minor validation gaps". There is no checkpoint for fetch failure (offline or moved URL) and no error-recovery loop, so it does not reach anchor 5; the operation is read-only, so the destructive/batch cap to 3 does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files needed and well-organized sections (How It Works, Guidelines Source, Usage), while the bulk content (the rules themselves) correctly lives one level deep at the fetched external URL for freshness. Per the rubric's simple-skill exception this warrants anchor 5.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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.

A well-constructed description with an explicit third-person capability statement and a strong, natural set of trigger phrases that fully answer both what the skill does and when to use it. Its main weaknesses are a thin capability enumeration on the "what" side and a few trigger overlaps with adjacent accessibility/design skills.

Suggestions

Expand the "what" clause with 2-3 concrete capabilities drawn from the guidelines (e.g., "checks accessibility, semantic HTML, forms, and interactive elements") to lift specificity.

Add one or two common synonyms such as "WCAG" or "design review" to the trigger list to broaden natural keyword coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance" names a concrete domain and a single review action, but the description never enumerates what the review covers (accessibility, semantics, performance), matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor. The quoted trigger phrases are invocation cues, not additional capabilities, so it does not reach anchor 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description explicitly answers both questions: the "what" ("Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance") and the "when" via an explicit "Use when asked to..." clause with five concrete trigger phrases, matching anchor 5. It is not anchor 4 because the "when" is already fully explicit and specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings like "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", and "check my site against best practices" give good keyword coverage, but common synonyms such as "WCAG", "usability", or "design review" are missing, matching anchor 4 rather than the comprehensive anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Web Interface Guidelines compliance" carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers, but phrases like "check accessibility" and "audit design" could overlap with dedicated accessibility or design-system skills, giving minor overlap risk consistent with anchor 4 rather than the minimal-conflict anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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
Draculabo/AntigravityManager
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.