CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

fallow

Codebase intelligence for JavaScript and TypeScript. Free static layer reports quality, changed-code risk, cleanup opportunities (unused files, exports, types, dependencies), code duplication, circular dependencies, complexity hotspots, architecture boundary violations, feature flag patterns, and opt-in security candidates. Runtime coverage merges production execution data into the same health report for hot-path review, cold-path deletion confidence, and stale-flag evidence, with a single local capture available by default and continuous/cloud runtime monitoring available as an optional mode. 118 framework plugins, zero configuration, sub-second static analysis. Use when asked to analyze code health, audit PR risk, find cleanup opportunities or unused code, detect duplicates, check circular dependencies, audit complexity, check architecture boundaries, detect feature flags, surface security candidates, clean up the codebase, auto-fix issues, merge runtime coverage, or run fallow.

Quality

87%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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.

A strong, highly actionable skill body with excellent workflow sequencing and validated destructive-operation handling, backed by a genuine, well-organized reference bundle. Its main cost is length: the duplicated intro and reference-grade table detail inflate the always-loaded context beyond what an overview needs.

Suggestions

Delete the opening paragraph that duplicates the frontmatter description word-for-word, or reduce it to one sentence.

Trim the Commands and MCP Tools table cells to a purpose plus a pointer (e.g., 'see references/cli-reference.md#security') — move suppression syntax, rule catalogues, and tuning-knob defaults into the CLI reference.

Move the full Issue Types catalogue and Node.js Bindings field reference into references/ and keep only the most common issue types and a minimal bindings example inline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with genuinely tool-specific facts, but the opening paragraph restates the frontmatter description verbatim, and the Commands and MCP Tools tables carry paragraph-length digressions (the `security` and `health` rows embed suppression syntax and rule catalogues; `ci reconcile-review` embeds a full behavior spec) that belong in references/cli-reference.md. Mostly efficient, but more than minor tightening is possible.

3 / 5

Actionability

Every section gives copy-paste-ready commands with exact flags (`fallow dead-code --format json --quiet --workspace 'apps/*'`), concrete exit-code semantics, JSON envelope shapes, and executable Node.js binding examples. The Instructions section converts user requests directly into specific commands.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints: the Safe auto-fix cycle is preview (--dry-run) → review → apply (--yes) → verify, Agent Rule 6 mandates dry-run before fix, and the destructive-fix path documents the non-TTY exit-code-2 failure mode with recovery guidance.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Three well-signaled, one-level-deep references (cli-reference.md, gotchas.md, patterns.md) exist on disk with clear purpose descriptions and no nested chaining beyond a sibling cross-link. However, a substantial amount of reference-grade detail (full flag inventories, MCP parameter defaults, the issue-type catalogue) is inlined in SKILL.md rather than split out, keeping it short of fully appropriate placement.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

88%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 specific, complete, third-person description with an explicit and extensive trigger clause. Its only weaknesses are a few missing natural synonyms (most notably 'dead code') and a handful of broad triggers that could collide with general code-review or security skills.

Suggestions

Add 'find dead code' (and ideally 'unused exports/dependencies') to the trigger clause — 'dead code' is the most natural user phrasing and the tool's own command name.

Narrow the broadest triggers ('audit PR risk', 'auto-fix issues', 'clean up the codebase') toward the tool's distinctive capabilities to reduce overlap with generic code-review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions with concrete objects — 'unused files, exports, types, dependencies', 'code duplication, circular dependencies, complexity hotspots, architecture boundary violations, feature flag patterns' — plus the runtime-coverage capability set, in comprehensive third-person detail. Coverage of the tool's capabilities is complete with no padding.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: a detailed 'what' (static layer capabilities plus runtime coverage merging) and a concrete 'when' clause enumerating fourteen trigger phrases starting with 'Use when asked to analyze code health, audit PR risk...'. This matches the top anchor's structure exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The 'Use when' clause covers many natural phrases ('clean up the codebase', 'find cleanup opportunities or unused code', 'detect duplicates', 'auto-fix issues', 'audit PR risk'), but omits the most natural user term 'dead code' (ironically the tool's own command name), plus synonyms like 'unused exports' and migration triggers like 'knip' or 'jscpd'. Good coverage, a few natural terms missing — not the comprehensive synonym-plus-extension coverage of the top anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The JS/TS scoping and specialized checks (circular dependencies, boundary violations, runtime coverage) give it a clear niche, but broad triggers like 'audit PR risk', 'auto-fix issues', 'clean up the codebase', and 'surface security candidates' overlap with generic code-review and security-review skills. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against closely related skills.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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

RaquelSousa/kel-portfolio-2.0

Path

.claude/skills/fallow/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.