CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

evm

Read-only EVM client: wallets, tokens, gas across 8 chains.

62

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./optional-skills/blockchain/evm/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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 content is a strong command-reference skill: fully executable commands with real examples, an explicit setup check and verification section with expected outputs, and an unusually honest Pitfalls section covering rate limits, single-endpoint dependencies, and L2 gas-fee caveats. Its only real weakness is redundancy — the command set is presented roughly three times (When to Use bullets, Quick Reference, and Procedure) — which inflates token cost and suggests splitting detailed per-command material into a reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and command-focused with almost no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'. Not a 5: the same commands appear up to three times (intro list, Quick Reference, Procedure — e.g. the whale and gas examples are duplicated nearly verbatim), so not every token earns its place; not a 3: the padding is minor and the Pitfalls/Verification sections are high-value, not unnecessary explanation.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every command is fully executable copy-paste-ready with real addresses (vitalik.eth, USDC/USDT contracts, a real tx hash), all flags shown with defaults ('whale --blocks 50 --min-usd 100000 --chain arbitrum'), and the SCRIPT assignment is provided up front — matching 'Fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases'.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Procedures are numbered 0–9 with a Setup Check ('python --version # 3.8+ required') up front and a dedicated Verification section stating expected outcomes ('Should print current block, gas price, ETH price', 'Should resolve vitalik.eth to 0xd8dA...'), and Pitfalls documents failure modes with remedies (e.g. ENS endpoint down → 're-run later or use a block explorer'). Not a 4: validation checkpoints are explicit with expected outputs, and as read-only single-command queries no destructive-operation loops are required.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle (a single scripts/evm_client.py, referenced by path and confirmed to implement all 14 documented subcommands) is appropriately surfaced as a one-level pointer, and the body is well-sectioned (When to Use / Quick Reference / Procedure / Chains table / Pitfalls / Verification), matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps'. Not a 5: the ~200-line body goes well beyond a concise overview — the Quick Reference and Procedure sections substantially overlap, and material like the per-command details or Pitfalls could live in a references/ file to keep SKILL.md a leaner index.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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, third-person, and distinct — it clearly names the domain and three capability areas. Its main weaknesses are the absence of any explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and the omission of the most natural user terms ('Ethereum', 'blockchain', 'balances') in favor of the more technical 'EVM'. Adding a trigger clause and one or two synonym terms would move it into the top tier.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks about Ethereum or other EVM-chain wallets, balances, tokens, gas prices, or transactions.'

Include natural synonyms users actually say — 'Ethereum', 'blockchain', 'balances', 'crypto' — alongside the technical term 'EVM'.

Use concrete action verbs (e.g. 'Query wallet balances, token prices, and gas costs across 8 EVM chains') instead of the generic 'client' noun phrase.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Read-only EVM client: wallets, tokens, gas across 8 chains" names the domain and three concrete capability areas ("wallets, tokens, gas"), but contains no action verbs beyond the generic "client" — comparable to the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'. Not a 2: it enumerates more than one specific capability area; not a 4: it does not list several distinct actions like 'query balances', 'decode transactions', 'track gas'.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (read-only EVM client covering wallets, tokens, gas on 8 chains), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance anywhere in the description, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric. Not a 4: 'when' is entirely absent rather than merely weak; not a 2: the 'what' half is concrete and specific.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"wallets", "tokens", and "gas" are natural user terms and "EVM" matches how technically-savvy users refer to Ethereum-family chains, matching 'Good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'. Not a 5: it omits the most common synonyms users would say — "Ethereum", "blockchain", "balances", "crypto" — and no chain names at all; not a 3: core natural vocabulary is present and specific, not generic.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Read-only EVM client" plus "across 8 chains" carves out a clear niche (EVM-chain queries as opposed to, e.g., a Solana skill), matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'. Not a 5: without naming the chains, a user asking about a generic 'blockchain wallet balance' could route to another blockchain skill; not a 3: the read-only EVM framing is far more specific than 'Works with document files'.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
NousResearch/hermes-agent
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.