CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-execution-fallback

Handle code execution failures with fallback strategies and anchored workspace paths

52

Quality

57%

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 ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/code-execution-fallback/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable with concrete executable code and a clear fallback ladder, but it is somewhat verbose and monolithic with implicit validation checkpoints between escalation levels. Splitting detail into reference files and tightening repeated examples would lift the lower dimensions.

Suggestions

Make the fallback escalation an explicit validate→fix→retry loop with a checkpoint at each level rather than leaving recovery implicit.

Move the 'Common Failure Scenarios' table and the full worked example into a referenced file to reduce inline length and improve navigation.

Consolidate the three workspace-anchoring demonstrations into one canonical example to remove redundancy.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean with executable code and brief 'Why:' notes, but workspace anchoring is demonstrated three times in different forms and the failure table overlaps the decision tree, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides complete, executable Python and bash snippets, a decision tree, a failure-mode table, and a fully worked robust file-generation example that is copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The Level 1→2→3 escalation and verification checklist give a clear sequence, but the validate→fix→retry feedback loop between fallback levels is implicit rather than an explicit checkpoint at each stage.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

It is a single ~155-line monolithic file with no external references and is well-organized into sections, but it exceeds the ~50-line simple-skill threshold and contains the failure table and worked example inline where splitting could aid navigation.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

50%

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 clear domain and a couple of capabilities but omits explicit trigger guidance and concrete actions, leaving it generic. It answers 'what' but not 'when', which caps several dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' trigger clause listing concrete failure signals (e.g., sandbox execution errors, files written to unexpected paths).

Name the concrete fallback actions (retry simpler code, run_shell heredoc, delegate to shell_agent) instead of the vague 'fallback strategies'.

Include natural user phrasings like 'code execution failed', 'sandbox error', or 'file written to wrong directory' as trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('code execution failures') and a couple of actions ('fallback strategies', 'anchored workspace paths'), but stays generic rather than listing concrete fallback moves like retry-simpler, run_shell heredoc, or delegate to shell_agent.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states what the skill does but lacks any 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the guideline completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like 'code execution failures', 'fallback strategies', and 'anchored workspace paths' are somewhat technical and miss the natural ways a user would phrase this need (e.g. 'code keeps failing', 'sandbox errors', 'file written to the wrong place').

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is fairly specific (execution fallback + workspace anchoring), but without explicit triggers it could still overlap with general coding or debugging skills.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

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.