glossary
How to add entries to the glossary
59
47%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
66%
1.22xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/glossary/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is too minimal to effectively guide skill selection. It identifies a narrow task (adding glossary entries) but fails to describe specific capabilities, provide trigger terms, or include any 'Use when...' guidance. It reads more like a section heading than a skill description.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'glossary', 'definition', 'term', 'terminology', 'add term', 'new entry'.
Expand the 'what' portion to describe specific actions such as formatting entries, specifying required fields (term, definition, category), and where the glossary file is located.
Use third person declarative voice and list concrete capabilities, e.g., 'Adds new term definitions to the project glossary file, including term name, definition, and optional category. Use when the user asks to define a term, add a glossary entry, or update terminology.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description mentions 'add entries to the glossary' which is a single vague action. It doesn't describe concrete capabilities like what format entries should be in, what fields are involved, or any other specific actions beyond 'add entries.' | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description only weakly addresses 'what' (adding glossary entries) and completely lacks any 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause caps this at 2 per the rubric, but the 'what' is also weak, so it scores 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains 'glossary' and 'entries' which are somewhat natural terms a user might say, but misses variations like 'definitions', 'terms', 'terminology', 'vocabulary', or file format references that would improve matching. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Glossary' is a somewhat specific domain that narrows the scope, but the description is so minimal that it could overlap with general documentation or content editing skills. It's not generic enough to be a 1, but lacks the precision for a 3. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a concise, well-scoped skill that efficiently communicates when and how to add glossary entries. Its main weakness is the lack of a concrete example showing what a complete glossary entry looks like, and the absence of a clear sequential workflow with validation (e.g., verifying that links resolve correctly).
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of a well-formed glossary entry showing the expected markdown format, including implementation links and cross-references.
Provide a brief ordered workflow: 1) Open glossary.md, 2) Find correct alphabetical position, 3) Add entry with links, 4) Verify all relative paths and cross-references resolve.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. It doesn't explain what a glossary is or how markdown links work—it assumes Claude's competence and only provides project-specific guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It provides some concrete guidance (link syntax, cross-reference syntax) but lacks a concrete example of a complete glossary entry showing the expected format, structure, or placement within the glossary file. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The steps are listed as bullet points but there's no clear sequence (e.g., open file, find alphabetical position, add entry, verify links). For a task that modifies a shared document, a brief ordered workflow with a validation step (e.g., check links resolve) would be more robust. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a simple, short skill like this, the structure is appropriate. It references the glossary file directly with a relative path, and the content is well-organized without unnecessary nesting or monolithic blocks. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- MetaMask/ocap-kernel
- Commit
052f4d4
- 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.