common-best-practices
Enforce SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, and intention-revealing naming across all languages. Use when refactoring for readability, applying clean-code patterns, reviewing naming conventions, or reducing function complexity.
89
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
92%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly articulates specific capabilities (SOLID principles, guard clauses, function size limits, naming conventions) and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms. The main weakness is potential overlap with other code review or refactoring skills due to its broad, language-agnostic scope, though the focus on specific clean-code patterns helps differentiate it somewhat.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: enforcing SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, and intention-revealing naming. These are well-defined, concrete coding practices rather than vague abstractions. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (enforce SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, intention-revealing naming) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause covering refactoring for readability, applying clean-code patterns, reviewing naming conventions, or reducing function complexity). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'refactoring', 'readability', 'clean-code patterns', 'naming conventions', 'function complexity', 'SOLID principles', 'guard-clause'. These cover a good range of terms developers naturally use when seeking this kind of help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it carves out a niche around clean code and SOLID principles, it could overlap with general code review skills, linting skills, or refactoring skills. The phrase 'across all languages' broadens scope significantly, increasing potential conflict with language-specific code quality skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, concise skill that efficiently communicates coding standards and conventions. Its main strength is token efficiency and clear organization. Its primary weakness is the lack of concrete before/after code examples that would make the guidance more immediately actionable, though the referenced files may cover this.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 brief before/after code snippets (e.g., a guard clause refactoring) to make the actionability more concrete and executable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Very lean and efficient. Every bullet point adds value without explaining concepts Claude already knows. No padding or unnecessary context—just the specific constraints and conventions to follow. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides specific guidelines (e.g., '<30 lines', 'isUserAuthenticated > checkUser', guard clauses) but lacks concrete code examples showing before/after refactoring. The guidance is specific enough to act on but not copy-paste executable. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a principles/conventions skill rather than a multi-step process skill. The single-purpose nature (enforce coding standards) is unambiguous, and the content is clearly organized into logical sections (Core Principles, Code Hygiene, Anti-Patterns) that make application straightforward. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clean overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references to CODE_STRUCTURE.md and EFFECTIVENESS.md. The main file stays concise while pointing to detailed materials for deeper guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard
- Commit
4c72e76
- 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.