CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

1k-app-upgrade-test

Create test versions to verify app auto-update functionality and version migration.

51

Quality

57%

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 ./.skillshare/skills/1k-app-upgrade-test/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

61%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 concise and well-structured with a real, clearly signaled reference, but it omits in-body validation for a destructive/batch workflow and leaves the central config-edit steps as high-level directions rather than concrete edits. Adding a validation checkpoint and concrete edit snippets (or pulling them forward from the reference) would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint before the commit-and-push step in the body (e.g., run the reference's Validation Checklist) to satisfy the destructive/batch workflow requirement.

Include concrete before/after edit snippets for at least one config file in the body, or explicitly state the edits are copy-paste ready in the referenced guide, so the core action is executable without opening the reference.

Remove the redundancy between Step 4's enumerated file list and the 'Files to Modify' table, or merge them, to tighten token efficiency.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with well-organized sections and executable bash blocks, but the intro repeats the description and the 'Files to Modify' table duplicates Step 4's file list, minor padding that keeps it just below a 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Git and build-number bash commands are executable, but the core task — editing six config files — is given only as high-level directions ('Set VERSION', 'Hardcode BUILD_NUMBER in... step') with no concrete edited snippets in the body, so key execution details are missing.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced, but this is a destructive/batch operation modifying six files and pushing a branch, and the body has no validation checkpoint; the validation checklist lives only in the reference, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is clear with well-signaled one-level-deep reference to references/rules/upgrade-test-version.md (a real file), but the body inlines the full workflow that the reference also covers, a minor organization gap versus ideal content splitting.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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 clear and specific about the skill's purpose but omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which caps completeness and limits trigger-term quality. It is mostly distinct from sibling skills but would benefit from explicit trigger phrases.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete trigger situations, e.g. "Use when creating QA upgrade builds, testing version migration, or verifying app auto-update flows."

Include natural synonyms users might say such as "upgrade testing", "QA build", or "release candidate" to broaden trigger coverage.

Tighten the what/when pairing to answer both questions explicitly rather than implying the trigger.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Create test versions" and "verify app auto-update functionality and version migration" name the domain plus one to two concrete actions but are not comprehensive, matching the score-3 anchor rather than 4 which requires several specific actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does but provides no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, and the rubric caps completeness at 3 when trigger guidance is missing; the implied 'when' is only weakly present.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "test versions", "app auto-update", and "version migration" are relevant and somewhat natural, but common synonyms (upgrade testing, QA builds, release candidate) and any file extensions are absent, so it fits the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Create test versions to verify app auto-update functionality and version migration" carves a mostly distinct niche with minor overlap risk against general release/dev-workflow skills, but it lacks the explicit distinct triggers that would warrant a 5.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
OneKeyHQ/app-monorepo
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.