CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

fallback-code-execution

Fallback workflow for running code via file write and shell when sandbox execution fails

61

Quality

72%

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/fallback-code-execution/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

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

The content is well-structured with a clear, validated workflow, but it is held back by placeholder code examples and a redundant Example Scenario that reduce conciseness and actionability.

Suggestions

Replace the placeholder script body ('# ... script logic ...') with a minimal but complete executable example so guidance is copy-paste ready.

Trim or merge the Example Scenario section into the Procedure, since it largely restates the same three steps.

Show the actual tool invocation form (e.g., concrete write_file / run_shell calls) instead of illustrative YAML blocks to strengthen actionability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts, but the Example Scenario section restates the Procedure and code examples use a placeholder ('# ... script logic ...') that could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete commands and paths are given ('python3 scripts/process_data.py'), but the script content is a placeholder and the YAML examples are illustrative rather than fully copy-paste-ready, leaving guidance incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Three steps are clearly sequenced with an explicit Step 3 verification (exit code 0, output check) and an error-feedback loop (inspect stderr), matching the validated-workflow anchor.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is self-contained with well-organized sections and no need for external references, which per the rubric note qualifies for a 3 without separate bundle files.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 concise and clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it, with a distinct trigger. It is slightly held back by limited action specificity and somewhat technical trigger phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and concrete mechanisms ('running code via file write and shell') but does not list multiple distinct actions, so it is not comprehensive enough for a 3.

2 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly states both what it does ('Fallback workflow for running code via file write and shell') and when to use it ('when sandbox execution fails'), satisfying the explicit-trigger requirement.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'running code' and 'sandbox execution fails', but 'fallback workflow' is technical phrasing and common user variations are missing.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The trigger is narrowly scoped to sandbox execution failure, giving it a clear niche that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

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.