CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

web3-fullstack-systematic-build

Systematic approach to building full-stack Web3 applications layer by layer

52

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/web3-fullstack-systematic-build/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 a well-sequenced, actionable build playbook with concrete code at every phase and a recovery loop. Its main weaknesses are mild redundancy that could be trimmed and validation checkpoints that are named but not given explicit commands.

Suggestions

Tighten or remove the 'Key Principles' section, which restates concepts already covered in the phase steps, to improve conciseness.

Add explicit validation commands at phase boundaries (e.g., 'npx hardhat compile && npx hardhat test' before moving from Phase 3 to Phase 4) to strengthen workflow checkpoints.

Move long code templates (e.g., the full PrivatePool.sol and DepositForm.jsx examples) into reference files under references/ and link to them, improving progressive disclosure for a 240-line skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with concrete code per phase, but includes redundant explanatory padding (the intro paragraph, the 'Key Principles' section restating phase concepts, and sentences like 'This establishes clear API boundaries'); matches 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than 4 which requires only minor trims.

3 / 5

Actionability

Each phase ships executable code (mkdir commands, Solidity interfaces, JS config, JSX component, deploy script) that is largely copy-paste ready, matching 'Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps'; not 5 because some examples are partial (ABI import stub, deploy script assumes Hardhat setup without showing it).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear six-phase sequence with per-phase 'Actions' lists plus a 'Recovery from Failures' feedback loop, matching 'Clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'; not 5 because validation checkpoints ('compile and test each contract') are stated but lack explicit commands, and not capped at 3 since this build workflow is not destructive/batch.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well-organized into clearly headed phases with no nested references and a self-contained structure (no bundle files exist to reference), matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed'; not 5 because at ~240 lines some long code examples could be split into reference files, and not the simple-skill exception which requires under 50 lines.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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 identifies a clear niche (full-stack Web3) but is generic in its action language and entirely lacks a 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness. It is distinguishable but would benefit from concrete capabilities and explicit trigger phrases.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions, e.g. 'Define interface contracts, implement Solidity core logic, configure frontend providers, and write deploy scripts layer by layer.'

Append an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when building full-stack Web3 / dApp projects that span smart contracts and frontend.'

Include natural synonyms users say (dApp, smart contracts, blockchain, DeFi, Solidity) to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('full-stack Web3 applications') but the only action is the generic 'building ... layer by layer', with no concrete actions like deploying contracts or writing tests; this matches the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' rather than 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

It has a clear 'what' ('building full-stack Web3 applications layer by layer') but no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 3, matching 'Has a clear what but when is missing or only weakly implied'.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Web3' and 'full-stack' are natural terms users would say, but common variations and synonyms (dApp, smart contract, blockchain, DeFi, Solidity) are missing, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'; not 4 because coverage is thin rather than 'good'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'full-stack Web3 applications' is a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against general full-stack build skills, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'; not 5 because the generic 'systematic approach ... layer by layer' phrasing could apply to non-Web3 build skills.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

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: 1 missing, 1 deeper-than-1-level

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.