CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

nemoclaw-maintainer-validate-launchable

Validate the staging NemoClaw Brev Launchable through its web journey or a deployed environment. Use for advisory validation outside automated E2E.

Quality

77%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/nemoclaw-maintainer-validate-launchable/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%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.

An unusually rigorous procedural skill: sequencing, validation checkpoints, failure classification, and reporting are excellent, and guidance is concrete down to exact artifact fields. The costs are token weight — a long monolithic file with a repetitive credential-policy section that should be split into reference files — and deferred CLI specifics.

Suggestions

Move the inference-credential authorization policy (the block spanning 'Before running inference checks' through the waiver rules) and the launchable-e2e.json field contract into one-level-deep reference files (e.g. references/credential-policy.md, references/artifact-contract.md), keeping a short summary and a 'See X' pointer in SKILL.md.

Consolidate the overlapping approval rules in the credential section into a single decision rule (one-commit vs bounded-session vs waiver) to remove repetition.

Include the concrete brev CLI commands for the access and runtime identity checks (environment lookup, state check, image metadata read) instead of only deferring to the brev-cli skill and the e2e shell script.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and imperative with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, but it could be tightened: the ~27-line inference-credential section repeats overlapping approval, session, and waiver rules ('Obtain explicit authorization before its first exposure', 'Authorization may cover one commit or an explicitly bounded PR validation session', 'Honor existing approvals limited to one commit or run; do not silently convert them...'), matching 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than 'minor instances'.

3 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is highly concrete for an instruction-only skill — exact artifact fields and required values ('candidateSha equal to the selected commit SHA', 'boot.schemaVersion equal to 1'), exact paths ('test/e2e/live/full-e2e.test.ts', 'tools/e2e/brev-launchable-e2e.sh'), and a copy-paste report template — but actual CLI invocations are deferred ('Derive the invocation ... from the current trusted tools/e2e/brev-launchable-e2e.sh implementation') rather than given, so it is mostly executable with minor gaps rather than fully copy-paste ready.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is clearly sequenced (safety boundaries, result boundary, image evidence, web journey, access/runtime, user journey, handoff, report) with explicit validation checkpoints ('Stop when the artifact is absent, malformed, or belongs to another commit'), error-recovery feedback (the complete pass / failed / partially blocked / not run taxonomy and cleanup verification 'even after a test failure'), and a checklist-style report structure, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with clear headers, but it is a ~190-line monolith with no bundle files at all: the detailed credential-authorization policy and the launchable-e2e.json artifact field contract are inlined content that clearly belongs in one-level-deep reference files, matching 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' rather than 'most content appropriately placed'.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

73%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 distinctive, correctly voiced description that answers both what and when with an explicit 'Use for' clause. Its weaknesses are limited specificity (only two actions named despite a multi-part validation procedure) and slightly jargon-bound trigger phrasing.

Suggestions

Enumerate the concrete validation actions in the description, e.g. 'Validate the staging NemoClaw Brev Launchable: web deployment journey, environment access, image and runtime identity, preinstalled user journey, and inference checks, then report a classified result.'

Add natural trigger phrasing users would actually say, such as 'Use when a maintainer asks to manually check, validate, or deploy the staging Brev Launchable or an existing Brev environment outside the automated E2E job.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('staging NemoClaw Brev Launchable') and two concrete actions ('validate ... through its web journey or a deployed environment'), but does not enumerate the skill's many concrete sub-checks (image identity, runtime identity, user journey, inference, reporting), so it matches the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than 'several specific actions'.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both 'what' (validate the staging Launchable via web journey or deployed environment) and an explicit 'Use for advisory validation outside automated E2E' trigger clause are present; the 'when' is explicit but phrased in abstract jargon rather than concrete user-trigger phrases, matching 'both present, when could be more explicit or specific' instead of the top anchor.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a maintainer would say are present ('staging', 'Brev', 'Launchable', 'deployed environment', 'advisory validation', 'automated E2E'), but a few common variations are missing (e.g. 'instance', 'deploy', 'brev.nvidia.com', 'manual check'), placing it at 'good coverage, a few natural terms missing' rather than comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'staging NemoClaw Brev Launchable' plus the advisory-vs-automated-E2E boundary carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers; it is unlikely to fire for any unrelated skill, matching the minimal-conflict anchor.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

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

NVIDIA/NemoClaw

Path

.agents/skills/nemoclaw-maintainer-validate-launchable/SKILL.md

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.