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. (triggers: **/*.ts, **/*.tsx, **/*.go, **/*.dart, **/*.java, **/*.kt, **/*.swift, **/*.py, solid, kiss, dry, yagni, naming, conventions, refactor, clean code)
90
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 communicates its purpose (enforcing clean code principles) with specific actions and explicit 'Use when' triggers. The extensive trigger term list covering both file patterns and conceptual keywords is a notable strength. The only minor weakness is potential overlap with other code-quality or language-specific refactoring skills due to the broad scope across many languages.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: enforce SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, and intention-revealing naming. These are well-defined, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (enforce SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, intention-revealing naming) and 'when' (refactoring for readability, applying clean-code patterns, reviewing naming conventions, reducing function complexity) with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including file extensions (*.ts, *.py, *.go, etc.) and conceptual keywords users would naturally say (solid, kiss, dry, yagni, naming, conventions, refactor, clean code). These match how developers naturally discuss code quality. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While the clean-code focus is fairly specific, the broad language coverage (TS, Go, Dart, Java, Kotlin, Swift, Python) and general terms like 'refactor' and 'conventions' could overlap with language-specific linting or refactoring skills. The niche is identifiable but not razor-sharp. | 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 conventions skill that efficiently communicates coding standards and anti-patterns. Its main strength is extreme token efficiency and clear organization. Its primary weakness is the lack of concrete code examples (before/after snippets) that would make the guidance more immediately actionable across the multiple languages it targets.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 brief before/after code examples demonstrating guard clauses or naming improvements to boost actionability from abstract rules to executable patterns.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Very lean and efficient. Every line delivers actionable guidance without explaining concepts Claude already knows. No padding or unnecessary context—just rules and constraints. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides specific rules (e.g., functions < 30 lines, guard clauses, naming examples like `isUserAuthenticated` > `checkUser`) but lacks executable code examples showing before/after refactoring patterns. The guidance is concrete but not copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a principles/conventions skill rather than a multi-step process skill. The single-purpose guidance is unambiguous and clearly organized into logical sections (Core Principles, Code Hygiene, Anti-Patterns). No destructive or batch operations require validation checkpoints. | 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 exploration. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard
- Commit
19a1140
- 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.