CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

source-code-inspection

Investigate application or repository source code with search_file and read_file to explain behavior, trace root causes of runtime or query errors, and answer with precise file citations.

64

Quality

76%

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 ./resources/skills/source-code-inspection/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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 content is concise, well-structured, and actionable, with a clear sequenced workflow and a useful retry feedback loop; it is a strong simple skill that earns top marks on conciseness and structure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and efficient with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section (When To Use, Workflow, Citation Format, Response Style) earns its place, matching the score-5 "lean and efficient" anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance — exact citation tokens like [[file:path/to/file.ts#L12]] and specific directives ('Use search_file first', 'refine the search and retry') — with only minor gaps, fitting the score-4 anchor; this is an instruction-only skill so the absence of code is not penalized.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced and includes a retry feedback loop ('If no matches found, refine the search and retry'), and because the skill is read-only the destructive-operation cap does not apply; it sits at score 4 rather than 5 because validation checkpoints are implicit rather than an explicit validate-then-proceed gate.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references and is organized into well-labeled sections, which per the simple-skills guideline allows progressive disclosure to score 5 on structure alone.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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.

The description is specific and reasonably distinct, naming concrete actions and natural trigger terms, but it omits any explicit "when to use" guidance, which caps its completeness score.

Suggestions

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing concrete user trigger phrases (e.g. 'Use when the user asks to debug a runtime error, trace where a SQL query is built, or explain code behavior with file citations').

Add natural synonyms users might say, such as 'debug', 'root-cause', or 'trace the code path', to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Optionally name common error patterns or signals (e.g. stack traces, UNKNOWN_TABLE-style errors) to sharpen distinctiveness from generic search skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — "Investigate...source code", "explain behavior", "trace root causes of runtime or query errors", "answer with precise file citations" — which is comprehensive but with minor coverage gaps, matching the score-4 anchor rather than the fully exhaustive score-5 example.

4 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear "what" but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 3 even though the capability statement is strong.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ("runtime or query errors", "trace root causes", "source code") with good coverage, but lacks synonyms or common variations, fitting the score-4 "good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing" anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The named tools (search_file, read_file) and the citation-oriented framing carve a distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against general code-search skills, aligning with the score-4 "mostly distinct; minor overlap risk" anchor.

4 / 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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
FrankChen021/datastoria
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.