CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

common-performance-engineering

Enforce universal standards for high-performance development. Use when profiling bottlenecks, reducing latency, fixing memory leaks, improving throughput, or optimizing algorithm complexity in any language.

60

Quality

71%

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 ./.github/skills/common/common-performance-engineering/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 skill body is well-structured, concise, and provides a clear profile-driven workflow with an explicit verification checkpoint. Its weakest area is actionability, since concrete executable code is offloaded to references rather than inlined for common cases.

Suggestions

Inline one or two short, copy-paste-ready code snippets (e.g. a profiling or memoization example) directly in the body so common cases are actionable without opening references.

Add an explicit error-recovery feedback loop to the Verify step (e.g. 'if a regression appears, revert the change and re-profile') to strengthen workflow clarity.

Either reference references/example.md from the body or remove it so all bundle files are reachable via clear navigation.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, bulleted, and assumes Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts, with only minor trim opportunities such as the sparse 'Canonical response anchors' section.

4 / 5

Actionability

It gives concrete directives ('Use Set for lookups', 'Protobuf, JSON minification', 'avoid O(n^2)') but the body itself contains no inline executable code; the runnable examples live entirely in references, leaving the inline guidance principle-level.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step Baseline/Identify/Fix/Verify sequence is present with an explicit validation checkpoint ('Verify: Re-profile to confirm improvement and check for regressions'), but no detailed error-recovery feedback loop or checklist reaches anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well organized into themed sections with a real one-level-deep reference (references/implementation.md) that exists and is signaled; minor gaps such as the orphaned references/example.md not linked from the body keep it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with strong natural trigger terms and a distinct performance niche. Its main weakness is a slightly abstract 'what' statement and broad language scope that create minor overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates several concrete actions ('profiling bottlenecks, reducing latency, fixing memory leaks, improving throughput, or optimizing algorithm complexity') but they lean toward capabilities rather than fully concrete deliverables, so it sits between the 3 and 5 anchors, closer to 4.

4 / 5

Completeness

It has both a 'what' and an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers; however the 'what' ('Enforce universal standards for high-performance development') is somewhat abstract compared to the concrete 'what' required for anchor 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger terms users say are well covered ('profiling', 'latency', 'memory leak', 'throughput', 'optimize'), but common synonyms like 'slow'/'speed up'/'fast' are absent, so it is above anchor 3 but not the comprehensive coverage of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The performance/latency/throughput niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, but the 'in any language' breadth and overlap with general code-quality skills keeps it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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.