CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tauri

Tauri commands, permissions, capabilities, security config, path handling, cross-platform file ops, and native filesystem APIs. Use when mentioning Tauri, desktop apps, Rust commands, invoke, capabilities, permissions, ResourceId, file paths, or platform differences.

65

Quality

82%

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

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 technically strong, highly actionable reference with excellent security guidance and executable examples, but it is a monolith: everything is inline in a long SKILL.md, and several sections (Import Pattern, Note on Async, the anti-patterns) repeat the same join()/dirname() and async/sync points. Moving the API tables to a references file and cutting duplication would improve both token efficiency and organization.

Suggestions

Move the 'Available Functions from @tauri-apps/api/path' tables (~60 lines of API reference) into a references/path-api.md file and keep only the most-used functions (join, dirname, appLocalDataDir) inline with a one-level-deep pointer.

Delete or merge the 'Import Pattern' and 'Note on Async' sections — the imports and the sep()/delimiter() sync/async facts are already demonstrated in the code examples and the Platform Constants table.

Consolidate the four Anti-Patterns (all variants of 'never hardcode separators / manual slicing — use join() and dirname()') into a single BAD→GOOD example pair, and add an explicit fix-and-retry loop (e.g., 'if cargo check fails on the specta builder, fix the collect_commands! registration and re-run') to the IPC verification workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly dense and high-value (the CSP rationale, tauri-specta sync rules, and ownership-boundary guidance all earn their tokens), but there is repeated content: the "Import Pattern" section re-lists imports already shown in examples, "Note on Async" re-states the sep()/delimiter() sync fact from "Platform Constants" with near-duplicate code, and the four "Anti-Patterns" all demonstrate the same join()/dirname() rule. Anchor 3 ('could be tightened') fits better than 4 ('only minor instances to trim') because the duplication spans whole sections.

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: a complete copy-paste csp/devCsp configuration, cargo check/test commands, a working saveData() filesystem routine, and correct/incorrect TypeScript pairs. Specific examples cover the common cases (path construction, parent-dir creation, filesystem writes). It does not fall to 4 — the only app-specific detail (the epicenter cargo manifest path) is appropriate grounding, not a gap.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Not a single sequential-process skill, but it embeds real decision procedures and checkpoints: the context-detection table routes frontend vs Node path APIs, IPC changes get "cargo check" + "cargo test export_types" verification, CSP changes get "smoke-test a real tauri dev AND a release build", and binding diffs get "inspect the diff before committing". Missing an explicit fix-and-retry loop after a failed cargo check, so anchor 4 ('most checkpoints present, minor gaps') rather than 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so all ~245 lines live inline in SKILL.md. The section headers are clear, but the ~60-line path-function API tables and the multi-function reference listings are classic reference-file material inlined into the overview, which is exactly anchor 3 ('content that should be separate is inline'). Not 2 because structure is present and navigation is easy; not 4 because nothing at all is split out despite the length.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 description: it states a multi-area capability list and pairs it with an explicit, trigger-rich 'Use when' clause in third person. Its only weaknesses are that the 'what' reads as topic nouns rather than concrete actions and a handful of generic trigger terms create minor overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates seven concrete capability areas ("Tauri commands, permissions, capabilities, security config, path handling, cross-platform file ops, and native filesystem APIs") with only minor gaps. It sits between anchors 3 and 5: broader and more comprehensive than 1-2 concrete actions, but the items are domain nouns rather than the fully concrete verbs ("Extract text... fill forms") of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Tauri commands, permissions, capabilities, security config, path handling...") and when ("Use when mentioning Tauri, desktop apps, Rust commands, invoke...") with a concrete trigger-phrase list, matching the anchor-5 example pattern. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is not merely present but specific and trigger-rich.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when mentioning Tauri, desktop apps, Rust commands, invoke, capabilities, permissions, ResourceId, file paths, or platform differences" gives good natural-phrase coverage — "invoke", "capabilities", "desktop apps" are terms a Tauri developer would actually say. Falls short of anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage (no variants like "tauri.conf.json", "CSP", "webview", "Rust backend"), but clearly exceeds anchor 3's partial keyword set.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear Tauri niche with distinctive triggers ("ResourceId", "invoke", "Rust commands") that would rarely pull in the wrong skill. A few generic terms ("permissions", "file paths") could overlap with generic security or path-handling skills, so minor overlap risk remains — anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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
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.