review-animations

Reviews animation and motion code against a high craft bar derived from Emil Kowalski's design engineering philosophy. Default to flagging; approval is earned.

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.cursor/skills/review-animations/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is review-animations in emilkowalski/skills

Quality

Content

92%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a tightly written, highly actionable review skill with a clear sequenced workflow and concrete examples; its one real defect is that it repeatedly references STANDARDS.md, which is missing from the bundle.

Suggestions

Add the referenced STANDARDS.md to the bundle (or to references/) so the in-body links resolve — currently the navigation points to a non-existent file.

If STANDARDS.md is intentionally omitted, inline the few precise values cited as needing it (easing curves, duration tables, spring configs) or remove the load instructions.

Confirm the reference path matches the actual bundle location (the body links STANDARDS.md at the skill root, so place it there or update the path).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what CSS transitions, springs, or easing are — and every section (ten standards, escalation triggers, remedial hierarchy, output format) earns its place, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor.	3 / 3
Actionability	It gives concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance: exact trigger patterns ('transition: all', 'scale(0)', 'ease-in'), a numbered remedial hierarchy with specific transforms, and a required findings-table format with real Before/After/Why examples and explicit Block/Approve criteria.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The review process is explicitly sequenced (ten standards -> escalation triggers -> remedial hierarchy -> two-part output) with concrete decision gates ('Block' vs 'Approve' criteria) functioning as validation checkpoints, and the output format is an unambiguous checklist.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The overview is well-structured and points to STANDARDS.md for the detailed rule catalog with clear load instructions, but the referenced STANDARDS.md file is not present in the bundle, so the one-level-deep navigation is broken — a real gap against the actual bundle structure.	2 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

57%

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 specific and distinctive, but it states only one action and lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, leaving its 'when' guidance implied rather than stated.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when reviewing animation or motion code, or when the user mentions transitions, easing, springs, or Framer Motion.'

Name a couple more concrete capabilities (e.g. 'flags feel-breaking regressions, suggests easing/origin/timing fixes') to lift specificity from one action to multiple.

Include natural variation terms users actually say (transitions, easing, springs, CSS animations) to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('animation and motion code') and the concrete action ('Reviews ... against a high craft bar') plus a posture ('Default to flagging; approval is earned'), but lists only a single action rather than multiple concrete capabilities, matching the score-2 anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated (reviewing animation/motion code against a craft bar), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 2 per the judging guidelines.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'animation and motion code' are natural terms a user might say, but common variations like 'transitions', 'easing', 'springs', 'CSS animations', or 'Framer Motion' are absent, so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description carves out a clear niche (animation/motion review with a default-flag posture) that is unlikely to trigger for general code review or unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 3 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: MODSetter/SurfSense
Path: .cursor/skills/review-animations/SKILL.md
Commit: 3b319ce

Reviewed: about 13 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.