CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cobejs

Use when adding a lightweight interactive globe with cobe (canvas setup, markers, interaction, performance, integration with React/Next.js).

67

Quality

80%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 body is an exemplary lean skill: terse pitfalls, a fully executable recipe, and no padding. Its two real weaknesses are the unfulfilled React/Next.js integration promise from the description and a body length just past the threshold where a fully inline single-file layout is automatic.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every token earns its place: pitfalls are terse one-liners ('Clamp DPR to 1–2'), the API section is a bare option enumeration, and the recipe carries no explanatory padding or concepts Claude already knows. This matches the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Actionability

The recipe is complete, copy-paste-ready code covering the primary case (responsive canvas with DPR clamp, markers, resize via destroy/recreate), plus concrete lifecycle calls. It falls short of 5 because the description promises 'integration with React/Next.js' yet the body contains no React-specific guidance at all.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The single action (embed a globe) is unambiguous and the recipe demonstrates the full loop including resize rebuild and destroy, so it is above the 'steps listed but checkpoints missing' anchor. Minor gaps keep it at 4: no cleanup guidance for component unmount (relevant given the React promise) and the 'What to ask the user' section is not sequenced into the workflow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file skill with clear, well-labeled sections (When to use / Key APIs / Pitfalls / Recipe / Questions) and no nested references. It scores 4 rather than 5 because at ~79 lines it exceeds the 'under 50 lines, no external references needed' simple-skill threshold, and the option catalog could plausibly live in a reference file.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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: third-person, specific about capabilities, and anchored to a distinct niche library. Its main weakness is that the 'when' half is a single generic clause without the concrete user-mention triggers that would make it comprehensive, and a few natural synonyms ('spinning globe', '3D globe') are absent.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('lightweight interactive globe with cobe') and lists several concrete aspects — 'canvas setup, markers, interaction, performance, integration with React/Next.js' — which matches the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor (lifecycle/teardown and configuration detail are not mentioned).

4 / 5

Completeness

Both 'what' ('adding a lightweight interactive globe with cobe' with listed capabilities) and 'when' ('Use when...') are explicitly present, but the when-clause is a single generic condition without concrete trigger phrases, matching 'both present; when could be more explicit or specific' rather than the 5 anchor's concrete triggers.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms users would say ('interactive globe', 'cobe', 'markers', 'React/Next.js'), but misses common variations like 'spinning globe', '3D globe', or 'earth', so it fits 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming the specific niche library 'cobe' gives a clear trigger niche with minimal overlap risk — it would not fire for generic three.js, map, or visualization requests.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
MengTo/Skills
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.