CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

company-logos

Use Iconify Simple Icons logos (64x64) instead of text logos.

60

Quality

70%

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 ./agent-skills/web-design/company-logos/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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 a lean, well-structured directive skill with concrete guidance and clean sections. Its only real gap is the absence of an executable Iconify snippet that would make the rendering step copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~23-line body assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what Iconify/Simple Icons is — and every line is directive (Use When triggers, 5-step Workflow, 3 Guardrails), matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete decision-level guidance is given (Iconify Simple Icons as source, 64x64 box then scale, monochrome-by-default, shared baseline/center grid, accessible labels) but no executable Iconify markup or API snippet is shown, leaving a minor gap below the fully copy-paste-ready anchor.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear, well-sequenced 5-step Workflow is present for a simple single-purpose design skill; no validation checkpoints are included, but this non-destructive rendering task does not require the destructive/batch validation cap, so it sits at the 'clear sequence, minor gaps' anchor rather than 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no need for external references and well-organized sections (Use When / Workflow / Guardrails), qualifying for the simple-skill exception that scores 5 on progressive disclosure from clear structure alone.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 concise and names a specific, recognizable capability, but it omits an explicit 'Use when' trigger and underuses natural synonyms. It reads as a clear what-statement without the when-guidance that would make it reliably triggerable.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete situations, e.g. 'Use when a design needs brand marks, logo rows, customer/partner proof, or tool badges' — this lifts completeness above the 3 cap.

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms users actually say — 'brand logos', 'brand marks', 'company icons', 'logo grid' — in addition to 'logos' and 'text logos'.

Fold in one or two more concrete actions from the body (monochrome-by-default, shared baseline/center grid) so the description lists several specific behaviors rather than a single substitution.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (brand logos via Iconify) and one concrete action with a parameter — 'Use Iconify Simple Icons logos (64x64) instead of text logos' — but does not list several specific actions, matching the 'domain + 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the multi-action anchor above.

3 / 5

Completeness

It gives a clear 'what' (use Iconify Simple Icons 64x64 logos instead of text) but no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the missing-trigger guidance completeness is capped at the 'clear what, when missing or weakly implied' anchor.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'logos', 'Simple Icons logos', and 'text logos' are relevant natural terms, but common variations users say — 'brand logos', 'brand marks', 'company icons', 'logo grid' — are missing, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Iconify Simple Icons logos (64x64) instead of text logos' carves a specific niche with a recognizable trigger and low conflict risk, but the lack of an explicit when-clause keeps it just below the fully-distinct anchor.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation16 / 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.