CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-review

How to review code; a pull request, feature branch, local changes etc.

84

1.14x
Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.14x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is appropriately lean and well-organized for a simple single-purpose skill, with a couple of concrete cross-skill directives, but its core review guidance is an abstract category list rather than actionable, executable steps.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable review steps (e.g., 'Run `git diff main...HEAD` to scope changes, then walk the diff section by section against the checklist').

Provide a small example of structured feedback output so Claude knows the expected format.

Reframe the bulleted categories as an ordered review workflow with a closing verification step (e.g., confirm each checklist item was addressed).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, covering only what is needed without explaining concepts Claude already knows; the lone 'Be constructive and helpful' line is minimal filler that does not undermine token efficiency.

3 / 3

Actionability

It gives a couple of concrete directives ('Use the repository's CLAUDE.md', 'invoke the glossary skill using: Skill tool with skill="glossary"'), but the core guidance is an abstract list of feedback categories rather than executable steps for how to conduct a review.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple single-task skill under 50 lines with a clear, well-organized bulleted action (provide feedback on the listed categories), so workflow clarity qualifies for the top score per the simple-skills scoring note.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets absent) and the skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references, so the well-organized inline sections satisfy the top progressive-disclosure anchor.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

65%

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 uses natural trigger terms, but it never provides an explicit 'Use when...' clause and only loosely enumerates review contexts rather than concrete actions, leaving the 'when' guidance implicit.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when the user asks to review a pull request, feature branch, or local code changes.'

Replace the scenario list with concrete review actions (e.g., 'Identifies bugs, flags style violations, and suggests improvements for pull requests and local changes').

Tighten the distinctiveness by naming the output, e.g., 'Produces structured review feedback for PRs and diffs,' to separate it from generic coding skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('review code') and enumerates several review contexts ('a pull request, feature branch, local changes'), but lists objects/scenarios rather than concrete review actions, so it stops short of comprehensive specificity.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states what the skill does ('How to review code') and implies when via scenario examples, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 2 per the judging guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'review code', 'pull request', 'feature branch', and 'local changes' are natural phrases users actually say when requesting a review, giving good coverage of common variations.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'review code' occupies a recognizable niche distinct from writing code, but the phrasing is broad enough that it could overlap with other general coding or QA skills.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

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
MetaMask/ocap-kernel
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.