python-debug-pattern

Debug Python script execution failures by capturing full output with exit codes and verifying working directory before file operations

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/python-debug-pattern/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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 highly actionable with executable, copy-paste-ready code and well-organized sections that fit a simple single-purpose skill. The main weakness is mild over-explanation of basic shell/Python concepts that Claude already knows.

Suggestions

Trim or condense the 'Why this works' bullets that explain 2>&1 and absolute paths, since Claude already understands these basics.

Add an explicit validate-and-retry feedback loop (e.g. re-run with the capture pattern after a failed file operation) to strengthen workflow_clarity for file operations.

Consider moving the 'Common Failure Modes' table into a brief inline reference or trimming it, as it partially restates the checklist.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with executable snippets, but "Why this works" bullets explaining 2>&1 redirection and the value of absolute paths over-explain concepts Claude already knows; it could be tightened, matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'.	3 / 5
Actionability	It provides copy-paste ready, fully executable commands (`python3 script.py 2>&1 ; echo Exit code: $?`) and complete Python snippets (os.getcwd, os.path.abspath, os.listdir), with good/bad examples covering the common failure cases, matching the 'fully executable; copy-paste ready' anchor.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The two techniques are clearly sequenced (numbered sections) with a Quick Checklist and a failure-mode table, and the command pattern itself surfaces the exit code as a verification signal; however there is no explicit validate-then-fix-retry feedback loop for the destructive/batch file operations it touches, so it sits just below the score-5 anchor with 'most checkpoints present'.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a compact, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no bundle files (references/scripts/assets are absent), and it is organized into clear sections (Core Technique, When to Apply, Quick Checklist, Failure Modes); per the rubric's simple-skill exception this earns the top score with well-organized sections and no need for external references.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 concrete and specific about its two debugging actions but omits any explicit 'Use when' trigger guidance, capping completeness at 3. Trigger-term coverage is decent but lacks natural synonyms a user would actually say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when' clause naming trigger phrases, e.g. 'Use when a Python script fails with an opaque error, a file operation fails unexpectedly, or a script works locally but fails in CI/CD'.

Broaden trigger terms with natural user phrasing like 'Python traceback', 'script won't run', or '.py files' to improve keyword coverage.

Optionally list one more concrete action (e.g. surfacing ImportError / module name) to push specificity toward a 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"capturing full output with exit codes and verifying working directory before file operations" names two concrete actions (capture full output with exit codes; verify working directory) but stops short of comprehensive coverage of debugging techniques, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the score-5 multi-action example.	4 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (debug failures via output capture and directory verification) but has no "Use when..." trigger clause, which the rubric explicitly caps at 3 when the 'when' is missing or only weakly implied.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Phrases like "Python script execution failures", "exit codes", "file operations", and "working directory" are relevant, but natural user phrasing such as "Python traceback", "script won't run", or ".py" synonyms are missing, leaving it at the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The narrow focus on Python script execution debugging and directory verification gives it a fairly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against general debugging skills, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the fully distinct score-5 niche.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: HKUDS/OpenSpace
Path: benchmarks/gdpval/skills/python-debug-pattern/SKILL.md
Commit: 3827781

Reviewed: 25 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.