CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-exec-fallback-266cba

Fallback workflow for reliable code execution when sandbox fails repeatedly

56

Quality

62%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/code-exec-fallback-266cba/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 a well-structured, actionable guide with a clear four-step workflow and concrete code examples. It is held back from the top band by some inferable explanation in the 'Why This Works' section and the absence of an explicit failure feedback loop.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the 'Why This Works' section and the 'Verify Python availability' note; these restate knowledge Claude already has.

Add an explicit feedback loop after Step 4 (e.g. 'if stderr is non-empty or exit code != 0, fix the script and re-run') to reach full workflow clarity.

Consider moving the full 'Complete Example' script into a referenced file to tighten the main body and improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with concrete code, but the 'Why This Works' section and notes like 'Most sandboxes have Python 3.x by default' are unnecessary explanation Claude could infer; not a 4 because these padded spots are noticeable.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete write_file/run_shell call syntax plus a full copy-paste-ready Python script are provided; minor gaps (placeholder 'Your Python code here' and tool-name assumptions) keep it just below fully executable 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four steps are clearly sequenced and Step 4 acts as a verify/diagnose checkpoint; not a 5 because there is no explicit failure feedback loop (fix-and-retry), only implicit diagnosis.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized with clear section headers and self-contained content needing no external references; not a 5 because it exceeds ~50 lines with everything inline rather than splitting detail into reference files.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 successfully pairs a clear trigger ('when sandbox fails repeatedly') with a stated purpose, but the action side is generic ('fallback workflow') rather than naming the concrete fallback steps. It is third-person and free of fluff, but lacks the specificity of stronger examples.

Suggestions

Name the concrete fallback actions in the description, e.g. 'writes scripts to a file and runs them via shell' instead of the generic 'Fallback workflow'.

Add natural trigger synonyms a user might say, such as 'sandbox timeouts' or 'code execution errors', to broaden trigger coverage.

Tighten 'reliable code execution' to something more specific to the fallback niche to further reduce overlap with general code-execution skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('code execution when sandbox fails') but the action is the generic phrase 'Fallback workflow' rather than concrete actions like write_file/run_shell; not a 3 because no concrete action is actually named.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both 'what' (fallback workflow for reliable code execution) and 'when' (when sandbox fails repeatedly) are present and the trigger is explicit, but the 'what' is generic so it does not reach the fully concrete trigger-phrase level of 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'sandbox fails repeatedly' is a relevant, fairly natural trigger phrase a user might say, but coverage is limited to this single phrase with no synonyms or variations.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'sandbox fails repeatedly' trigger carves a clear, fairly distinct niche with minimal conflict risk, though the broad term 'code execution' leaves minor overlap with general execution skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
HKUDS/OpenSpace
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.