CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

shell-agent-file-ops

Leverage shell_agent for autonomous file creation and modification with automatic tool selection and error recovery

57

Quality

65%

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/shell-agent-file-ops/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 body is a well-organized, mostly lean instruction skill with concrete delegation examples and useful do/don't anti-patterns. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: batch/destructive examples are presented without explicit validation or feedback checkpoints, which caps that dimension despite the otherwise clear structure.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation/feedback step for batch and destructive examples (e.g., after 'Update all configuration files', instruct to verify each file still parses and re-delegate fixes if any fail).

Show the literal shell_agent invocation syntax in at least one example instead of only describing the delegation in prose, to close the actionability gap.

Trim the redundant Summary and the 'The shell_agent will:' numbered list, which restate content already covered, to tighten conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean with short lists and concrete prompt examples, but the closing Summary and the numbered 'The shell_agent will:' block restate known behavior and could be trimmed; fits 'efficient with minor over-explanation'; not 5 due to that redundant restating, not 3 because padding is minor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste-ready task descriptions ('Create a comprehensive SOAP note file...', 'Update all configuration files... timeout: 300') and do/don't anti-patterns give actionable guidance for the delegation paradigm; not 5 because the actual shell_agent invocation syntax is never shown (only described), leaving a minor gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Although this is a single-action delegation skill, the batch example ('Update all configuration files in the config/ directory') and the error-recovery framing involve destructive/batch operations with no explicit validation or verify-then-fix checkpoint, triggering the cap-at-3 rule; not 4 because the validation cap takes precedence, not 2 because structure and sequence are clearly present.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A compact, single-purpose skill with no bundle files and well-organized sections (Purpose, When to Use, How to Use, Best Practices, Comparison, Anti-Patterns, Summary) fits the simple-skill exception for a top score; not 4 because there are no organization gaps to dock it.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

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 conveys a clear capability set around delegating file operations to shell_agent, but it lacks any 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which limits completeness and trigger-term quality. Specificity and distinctiveness are solid thanks to the concrete capability list and tool-specific framing.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete user triggers (e.g., 'Use when creating, editing, or organizing files and the best approach (Python vs Bash) is unclear, or when you want automatic error recovery').

Include more natural user-facing synonyms and file extensions (create/edit/write files, .md, .json, .csv) to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Drop the jargon verb 'Leverage' in favor of a direct third-person action ('Delegates file creation and modification to shell_agent...').

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the file-operations domain plus several concrete capabilities ('autonomous file creation and modification', 'automatic tool selection', 'error recovery'), matching the 'lists several specific actions' anchor; not 5 because coverage is not comprehensive across many distinct actions.

4 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear 'what' (autonomous file creation/modification with tool selection and error recovery) but no 'when'/Use-when clause, which caps completeness at 3 per the missing-trigger-clause rule; not 4 because there is no explicit 'when' guidance at all.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like 'file creation' and 'modification' appear, but common synonyms (edit, write, organize) and file extensions are missing and 'Leverage shell_agent' is jargon, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'; not 4 due to thin keyword coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tying the skill to a specific tool (shell_agent) and a specific delegation-vs-direct-tools framing makes it mostly distinct with only minor overlap with general file skills; not 5 because it could still overlap broadly with file-creation skills, not 3 because it is more specific than 'works with document files'.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.