CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

improve-codebase-architecture

Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.

64

Quality

77%

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 ./.cursor/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is improve-codebase-architecture in mattpocock/skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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.

A well-structured, actionable instruction-only skill with a clear workflow and concrete guidance throughout. The principal weakness is progressive disclosure: the body references detail files (LANGUAGE.md, INTERFACE-DESIGN.md) that are not present in the bundle, leaving dead links.

Suggestions

Add the referenced bundle files (LANGUAGE.md, INTERFACE-DESIGN.md) under references/ so the inline links resolve, or inline the essential content and drop the dead references.

Decide whether the inline glossary summary is needed given LANGUAGE.md holds full definitions; keeping only the terms used in SKILL.md would tighten conciseness.

Add a brief validate/confirm checkpoint in the grilling loop (e.g., re-running the deletion test on the proposed deepened module) to give the workflow an explicit feedback loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean and efficient; the inline glossary and principles are skill-specific vocabulary discipline that earns its place, though the glossary is summarized inline AND deferred to LANGUAGE.md, a minor redundancy that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance ('use the Agent tool with subagent_type=Explore', an explicit candidate format with Files/Problem/Solution/Benefits fields, concrete side-effect rules in the grilling loop) with only minor gaps in how the Explore call itself is structured.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-phase sequence (Explore → Present candidates → Grilling loop) with explicit gating checkpoints ('Do NOT propose interfaces yet. Ask the user: Which of these would you like to explore?') and the deletion-test heuristic, though it lacks an explicit error-recovery feedback loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References are well-signaled and one-level-deep (LANGUAGE.md, INTERFACE-DESIGN.md, ../grill-with-docs format docs), but no bundle directories (references/, scripts/, assets/) exist, so LANGUAGE.md and INTERFACE-DESIGN.md are dangling references that break navigation.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong description that clearly states both capability and trigger conditions in third-person voice with concrete, natural-language triggers. The main weakness is the skill-specific jargon ('deepening opportunities') leading the capability statement and minor synonym gaps in the trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ('find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable'), but the lead phrase 'deepening opportunities' is skill-specific jargon rather than a plain capability, keeping it just below comprehensive.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by...CONTEXT.md and...docs/adr/') and when ('Use when the user wants to improve architecture...') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ('improve architecture', 'find refactoring opportunities', 'consolidate tightly-coupled modules'), but misses common synonyms like 'refactor the code', 'decouple', or 'clean up the architecture'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The architecture-deepening niche is mostly distinct, but 'improve architecture' and 'find refactoring opportunities' are broad enough to overlap with general refactoring or code-review skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

relative_links

Relative link issues: 4 missing, 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
MODSetter/SurfSense
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.