CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ce-test-xcode

Test iOS apps in a simulator with XcodeBuildMCP. Use when iOS changes need simulator evidence before handoff.

65

Quality

79%

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 ./skills/ce-test-xcode/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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.

An exemplary instruction-only skill body: lean, tightly structured, with precise result semantics, explicit failure gates, and clean delegation to two well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files. The only mild deduction is that all executable command detail lives in the references rather than the body.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The 27-line body explains nothing Claude already knows; every line states contract (result semantics, stop conditions, boundaries) or routing. It matches 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place' — no neighboring anchor fits better.

5 / 5

Actionability

The body gives concrete, executable orchestration: named file paths to read in sequence ("Read `references/setup-and-build.md`", "After launch, read `references/test-and-report.md`"), explicit result-derivation rules, and a defined stop condition. It is not 5 because the executable detail (commands, tool calls) is entirely delegated to the references rather than present in the body, leaving minor gaps; it exceeds 3 since the guidance given is specific and directly followable, not pseudocode.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear two-stage sequence (prepare/launch → exercise/report) with explicit validation checkpoints: "Any failure before the app is launched with log capture running stops later stages", evidence-derived PASS/FAIL/SKIP rules, and an overall rollup rule. The references add a retest loop after an applied fix, satisfying the feedback-loop requirement.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a pure overview with two one-level-deep references (both verified to exist) that are clearly signaled with what each contains; no content that belongs in a separate file is inlined. This matches the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 concise, grammatical, third-person description with an explicit 'Use when' trigger and excellent distinctiveness. Its weaknesses are thin capability coverage (one action verb) and missing natural trigger variations like 'Xcode', 'iPhone', or 'run in the simulator'.

Suggestions

Add one or two more concrete capabilities to the 'what' clause (e.g., 'Build, launch, and test iOS apps in a simulator with XcodeBuildMCP, capturing screenshots and logs as evidence').

Broaden trigger terms with natural user phrasings: mention 'Xcode', 'iPhone', or 'run the app in the simulator' in the 'Use when' clause.

Consider covering more than one trigger scenario (e.g., 'when iOS changes need verification in a simulator, or when the user asks to test an app build') to strengthen completeness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Test iOS apps in a simulator with XcodeBuildMCP" names the domain and one concrete action plus the tool, matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage. It is not a 4 because only a single action verb ('Test') is offered, with no companion actions such as building, capturing logs, or screenshots.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicitly present: what ("Test iOS apps in a simulator with XcodeBuildMCP") and when ("Use when iOS changes need simulator evidence before handoff"). Not 5 because the 'what' is a single thin action and the 'when' is a single narrow trigger phrase rather than a set of concrete trigger variations; it clears 4 because the when-clause is explicit and usable.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords exist ("iOS", "simulator", "iOS changes", "XcodeBuildMCP") but common natural variations are missing — users would say "Xcode", "run my app", "iPhone", "test on the simulator". It sits at 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations', not 4, since several natural phrasings a user would actually say are absent.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pairing of "iOS apps", "simulator", and the named tool "XcodeBuildMCP" carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with other skills; no neighboring anchor fits better.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin
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.