CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

cw-save

Capture a confirmed writing preference, editorial lesson, recurring failure pattern, or workflow improvement in the right durable context file. Use when the user asks to save, remember, codify, or turn a repeated correction into a rule.

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.

The body is a well-structured, concise instruction skill: a classification table, a generalization-decision section, concrete write steps, and a confirm step. It loses points mainly because the confirm step is a report-back rather than an explicit validate-retry loop, and the one referenced file is missing from the bundle.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry loop to the Confirm step (e.g., re-read the destination file to confirm the rule landed correctly and re-revise if it duplicated or overwrote existing guidance) to push workflow_clarity toward 5.

Provide the referenced `../../references/context-contract.md` in the bundle (or inline the essential contract rules) so the single external reference actually resolves.

Tighten the audience-learning paragraph in 'Decide Whether It Should Generalize' — it currently repeats scope/authorization points that could be condensed to one sentence.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient and assumes Claude's competence — it does not explain what VOICE.md or style files are — but a few sentences (e.g. the audience paragraph) could be tightened, fitting the 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor rather than the lean 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

The classification table maps each learning type to a concrete destination file, and 'Write Precisely' gives five concrete steps (read before editing, narrowest rule, preserve context, record mechanism/consequence, keep examples fresh), which is mostly executable guidance with minor gaps; as an instruction-only skill the absence of code is not penalized, so it is not the lower 3-anchor.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequence is present (Load the Context Contract → Classify → Decide Whether It Should Generalize → Write Precisely → Confirm) with a confirm/verification checkpoint, but the validation is a final reporting step rather than an explicit validate→fix→retry loop, fitting the 'clear sequence with most checkpoints; minor validation gaps' anchor rather than the explicit-feedback-loop 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized and the single external reference ("Read `../../references/context-contract.md`") is clearly signaled, but that referenced file is not present in the bundle, a minor organization gap that keeps it at the 4-anchor rather than the clean one-level-deep 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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 concrete capture actions, an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause with natural user language, and a distinctive editorial-learning niche. Minor keyword-synonym and coverage gaps keep specificity and trigger quality at 4 rather than 5.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Capture a confirmed writing preference, editorial lesson, recurring failure pattern, or workflow improvement in the right durable context file" lists several concrete capture actions and a concrete destination class, with only minor coverage gaps, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the comprehensive 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what (capture a confirmed learning into the right durable context file) and when ("Use when the user asks to save, remember, codify, or turn a repeated correction into a rule") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the 5-anchor; it is not the 4-anchor because the 'when' is explicit and trigger-specific rather than merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when the user asks to save, remember, codify, or turn a repeated correction into a rule" supplies natural user phrases, but a few common synonyms (e.g. 'note this', 'keep', 'make a rule') are absent, so it sits at 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than the comprehensive 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The writing/editorial-context-persistence niche is mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against a general memory skill, fitting the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills' anchor rather than the clear-niche 5-anchor.

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

EveryInc/compound-writing

Path

skills/cw-save/SKILL.md

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.