CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

change-proposal

Present proposed code changes visually before implementing: before/after diffs, ASCII diagrams, comparison tables. Use when: "show me options for this change", "compare approaches", or a multi-file change needs a before/after comparison before editing. Not for planning questions with no concrete code change on the table.

68

Quality

83%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 tight, example-rich skill body that teaches three concrete visual tools and a clear proposal sequence without padding. Strong across all dimensions with only minor organization and actionability gaps.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and example-driven with no concept explanations, though the 'Good vs Bad Proposals' section partly re-illustrates rules already stated above.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete formats — fenced diffs with file paths, an ASCII character set, table layout, and a real worked example — but examples are domain-specific illustrations rather than generic copy-paste templates.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Proposal Structure' section gives a clear 5-step sequence and the scaling table scopes it by complexity; this is a presentation skill (not destructive/batch), so no validation cap applies, though explicit checkpoints are minimal.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clear sections and self-contained with no bundle files needed; the single external pointer (writing-voice) is clearly signaled.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 strong, specific description that clearly answers what and when with natural trigger phrases and a useful negative boundary. Only minor weakness is limited synonym coverage in trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names three concrete, distinct actions — 'before/after diffs, ASCII diagrams, comparison tables' — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill produces.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly states both what it does (visual change proposals) and when to use it ('Use when: ...'), with concrete trigger phrases plus a 'Not for' boundary.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural quoted phrases users would say ('show me options for this change', 'compare approaches') but lacks synonyms and file-extension variants for full coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (visual pre-implementation change proposals) and the 'Not for planning questions with no concrete code change' boundary minimizes overlap with planning skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
EpicenterHQ/epicenter
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.