CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

common-documentation

Write effective code comments, READMEs, and technical documentation following intent-first principles. Use when adding comments, writing docstrings, creating READMEs, or updating any documentation.

68

1.14x
Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.14x

Average score across 1 eval scenario

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/common/common-documentation/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 skill body is well-organized and appropriately leans on reference files for large examples, but it is more prescriptive than actionable and lacks an explicit workflow sequence with verification checkpoints.

Suggestions

Add at least one inline copy-pasteable template (e.g. a JSDoc or triple-slash docstring skeleton) so guidance is executable rather than only named.

Link the reference files explicitly from the body (e.g. "See [implementation.md](references/implementation.md) for BAD/GOOD comment examples") so navigation is signaled.

Remove or condense the "Canonical response anchors" section, which restates terms already covered in the body and adds little.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean bullet points that assume Claude's competence, but the closing "Canonical response anchors" section re-lists domain terms (JSDoc, Usage, why) already covered in the body, which is mild padding.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is concrete in spots (e.g. "Format: TODO(username): description", Mermaid.js, Swagger/OpenAPI, `docs/adr/`) but largely directive rather than executable; the only runnable code example lives in a reference file, and many sections give format names without copy-pasteable templates.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Sections are thematically organized but there is no sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints; documentation is not a destructive/batch operation so the cap does not apply, yet the single-purpose process still lacks explicit ordering or verification steps.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well-organized into clear sections with one-level-deep references to real bundle files (references/implementation.md, references/example.md) that hold the larger code blocks, though the body never explicitly signals those reference files by path.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

91%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 is strong and well-structured, clearly answering both what the skill does and when to use it with natural, comprehensive trigger terms. Minor overlap risk comes from the broad "any documentation" phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete artifact types — "code comments, READMEs, and technical documentation" with format specifics like "docstrings" and "READMEs" — but stops short of enumerating concrete actions per artifact, leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Write effective code comments, READMEs, and technical documentation following intent-first principles") and when ("Use when adding comments, writing docstrings, creating READMEs, or updating any documentation") with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural trigger coverage including "comments", "docstrings", "readmes", and "documentation", which are exactly the terms a user would naturally say when needing this skill.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The documentation niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, but "updating any documentation" is broad and could overlap with code-generation or language-specific skills that also touch docstrings.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard
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.