CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

sandbox-execution-fallback

Recover from execute_code_sandbox failures by writing Python scripts to files and executing via run_shell

61

Quality

71%

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

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is highly actionable with executable code, a well-sequenced recovery workflow that includes verification, and clean section organization. The only notable weakness is mild redundancy where the complete example and supplementary sections restate content already covered.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with no basic-concept padding, but the 'Complete Example' largely re-illustrates the procedure already shown in Steps 2-3, and 'Why This Works' and 'Common Use Cases' add somewhat redundant length, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready guidance: concrete write_file(...) calls with real Python, run_shell(command="python3 script_name.py"), a complete pandas/openpyxl example, and troubleshooting commands like 'pip3 install pandas openpyxl', matching 'fully executable code/commands; copy-paste ready'.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear 4-step sequence is given with an explicit validation checkpoint ('Step 4: Verify Output', reinforced by 'ls -la pnl_report.xlsx' in the example) plus a Troubleshooting feedback loop for error recovery, matching 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery'.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed; the skill is organized into clear, well-labeled sections (When to Use, Recovery Procedure, Complete Example, Best Practices, Troubleshooting), so per the simple-skills note it scores 3 on well-organized sections alone.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 specific and distinct, clearly conveying a narrow recovery technique tied to a concrete tool-failure trigger. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and natural trigger-term variations like timeouts.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when execute_code_sandbox fails or times out', to raise completeness and trigger clarity.

Broaden trigger terms to include natural phrasings users would say, such as 'timeout', 'sandbox error', or 'code execution failed', not just the tool name.

Optionally enumerate a couple more concrete actions or use cases to move specificity from 'some actions' toward a comprehensive capability list.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('execute_code_sandbox failures') and two concrete actions ('writing Python scripts to files and executing via run_shell'), but it describes a single recovery technique with two steps rather than a comprehensive list of capabilities, matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is explicit ('writing Python scripts to files and executing via run_shell'), and the 'when' is only implied via 'from execute_code_sandbox failures' with no explicit 'Use when...' clause and no mention of timeouts, so per the guideline completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The only trigger term is 'execute_code_sandbox failures', which is tool-name jargon; common variations a user would say such as 'timeout', 'sandbox error', or 'code execution failed' are missing, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche (recovering from execute_code_sandbox failures via file-writing and run_shell) with a distinct trigger unlikely to overlap with other skills, matching 'clear niche with distinct triggers; unlikely to conflict'.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

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.