golang-expert

Go programming expert for goroutines, channels, interfaces, modules, and concurrency patterns

Quality

53%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./crates/openfang-skills/bundled/golang-expert/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-organized, concrete Go idioms reference, but it largely restates knowledge Claude already has and offers only inline code fragments rather than complete executable examples, leaving conciseness and actionability at the mid level.

Suggestions

Trim already-known Go idioms (context.Context-first, accept-interfaces-return-structs, sync.Once basics) and retain only the non-obvious or project-specific guidance to improve token efficiency.

Add at least one complete, executable code example (e.g., a full fan-out/fan-in worker pool using errgroup with context cancellation) rather than only inline fragments.

If the skill is meant to guide a concrete task (e.g., "review or refactor Go code"), add a short sequenced workflow with an explicit validation/check step; otherwise state plainly that it is a reference checklist.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is efficient in form (one-line bullets, no padded preamble), but much of it restates Go idioms Claude already knows (context.Context-first, accept-interfaces-return-structs, sync.Once, table-driven tests), so it fits anchor 2 rather than the every-token-earns-its-place bar at 3.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete inline fragments ("fmt.Errorf(\"operation failed: %w\", err)", "errgroup.Group from golang.org/x/sync/errgroup", table-driven struct shape) but no complete, executable code block or copy-paste-ready example, matching anchor 2 rather than fully-executable at 3.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Content is well-organized into clear sections (Principles, Techniques, Common Patterns, Pitfalls), but there is no multi-step process, sequence, or validation checkpoint, and it is not a single unambiguous task, so it sits at anchor 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines, self-contained with no need for external references, and uses well-organized section headings, which per the rubric scoring notes lets progressive disclosure score 3.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 concrete and Go-specific, clearly conveying the domain, but it lacks an explicit trigger clause and reads as a topic list rather than a list of actions, capping completeness and specificity at the mid level.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause (e.g., "Use when writing, refactoring, debugging, or reviewing Go code, especially involving concurrency, channels, goroutines, interfaces, or modules.") to raise completeness and provide clear trigger guidance.

Lead with concrete action verbs (write, refactor, debug, review, optimize) instead of only naming topics, so specificity reaches the multiple-concrete-actions bar.

Include common natural variations users say ("Golang", "Go code", "Go unit tests", "go modules") alongside the existing terms to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the Go domain plus several concrete topics ("goroutines, channels, interfaces, modules, and concurrency patterns"), but lists capabilities/topics rather than concrete actions (no write/refactor/debug verbs), matching anchor 2 and falling short of the multiple-specific-actions bar at 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly states what the skill covers but has no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so per the rubric guidelines completeness is capped at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant natural Go terms a user would say (goroutines, channels, concurrency patterns), but misses common variations such as "Golang", "Go code", or "unit tests", so it lands at anchor 2 rather than full coverage at 3.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Go-specific concurrency primitives give it a distinct niche, but the broader "interfaces, modules" scope could still overlap with a general Go skill, fitting anchor 2 rather than the clearly-non-conflicting bar at 3.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: RightNow-AI/openfang
Path: crates/openfang-skills/bundled/golang-expert/SKILL.md
Commit: acf2587

Reviewed: about 8 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.