CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

daily-coding

Use for everyday coding tasks that involve writing or modifying source code.

45

Quality

48%

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/daily-coding/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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, compact checklist with a clear phase sequence and genuinely useful concrete items, plus two executable code examples. Its main weaknesses are padding with basic programming concepts Claude already knows and a few checklist items that tell Claude what to achieve without how to verify it. Overall a solid, actionable skill body with minor trimming and concretization opportunities.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean and well-formatted, but the "Common Mistakes to Avoid" code examples (mutable default arguments, bare `except`) teach basic programming concepts Claude already knows and earn no new information per token.

3 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is mixed: several items are concrete and executable ("Must read target file with Read tool", "avoid `any` in TypeScript", "Use pathlib for file paths", plus two complete runnable snippets), but others are abstract with no method given ("Understand context", "Ensure code runs correctly with no syntax errors").

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-phase sequence (Before Starting → During Coding → After Completion) with explicit end-of-work checkpoints (verify execution, clean up, brief summary), but there is no error-recovery feedback loop describing what to do when verification fails.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed: the content is compact, self-contained, and organized under clear section headers with nothing that should be split into separate reference files.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

32%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 states a usable trigger condition but omits the skill's purpose entirely, leaving a reader unable to tell what invoking it will do. Its scope ("everyday coding tasks") is far broader than the skill's actual role as a lightweight QA checklist, creating high conflict risk with other coding skills. Score 2 overall: the 'when' is clear, but the 'what' is missing and the trigger vocabulary is thin.

Suggestions

State what the skill does in the description, e.g. 'Runs a lightweight coding QA checklist (read-before-modify, minimal diffs, type safety, security checks, cleanup) before finishing...' so both 'what' and 'when' are explicit.

Broaden trigger vocabulary with natural user phrasings such as 'write', 'implement', 'add', 'modify', or 'refactor' code, matching the "User requests like" list already present in the body.

Narrow the trigger from 'everyday coding tasks' to something more distinct, or explicitly exclude specialized skills (bug-detective, architecture-design, verification-loop) in the description to reduce wrong-skill triggering.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("everyday coding tasks that involve writing or modifying source code") but the only actions stated are the generic "writing or modifying"; the skill's concrete capability (running a QA checklist) is never mentioned.

2 / 5

Completeness

Only the 'when' is present ("Use for everyday coding tasks that involve writing or modifying source code"); the 'what' — what the skill actually does when triggered — is entirely absent.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"writing or modifying source code" includes natural phrases users say ("write...", "modify..."), but common variations and synonyms such as "implement", "add", "refactor", or "fix" are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Everyday coding tasks" is very broad and overlaps with virtually all coding skills; the body itself acknowledges overlap with `bug-detective`, `architecture-design`, and `verification-loop`.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

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
Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar
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.