form-auto-save

Automatic form submission after user input changes using a debounce mechanism to prevent excessive server requests. Creates a seamless auto-save experience for forms with rich text editors or multiple fields.

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/form-auto-save/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

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 communicates the core concept of debounced auto-submission clearly but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for skill selection. It has reasonable domain specificity but could benefit from more concrete trigger terms and clearer differentiation from general form-handling skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants forms to auto-submit on input change, needs debounced form submission, or asks about auto-save for form fields.'

Include more natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'auto-submit', 'onChange submit', 'delayed submission', 'prevent duplicate requests', or specific framework references if applicable.

List more concrete actions like 'implements debounce timers on input events, cancels pending submissions on new changes, provides visual save-status indicators' to increase specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (form submission) and some actions (debounce mechanism, auto-save), but doesn't list multiple concrete implementation actions like specific code patterns, frameworks, or steps involved.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (automatic form submission with debounce) but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'debounce', 'auto-save', 'form submission', 'rich text editors', but misses common user variations like 'auto-submit', 'delayed submit', 'prevent duplicate requests', 'onChange submit', or framework-specific terms.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of debounce + form submission + auto-save is somewhat specific, but 'forms with rich text editors or multiple fields' could overlap with general form handling or rich text editor skills.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Implementation

42%

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

The skill excels at actionability with complete, executable code examples and clear file paths, but suffers from significant verbosity and poor content organization. Explanatory text about when to use auto-save, what passive listeners do, and what turbo_permanent means wastes tokens on things Claude already knows. The monolithic structure with ~200 lines of content would benefit greatly from splitting testing and troubleshooting into separate referenced files.

Suggestions

Remove the 'When to Use', 'Related Patterns', and explanatory comments (e.g., what passive listeners do, what turbo_permanent does) to cut token usage significantly — Claude already knows these concepts.

Split the testing section (turbo-fetch controller, helper, system specs) into a separate TESTING.md file and reference it from the main skill.

Move the 'Common Issues' troubleshooting section to a separate TROUBLESHOOTING.md or inline it as brief bullet points rather than expanded sections.

Add an explicit validation step after controller setup, such as verifying the controller connects by checking browser console or confirming the form element has the correct data attributes.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is quite verbose with unnecessary explanations Claude already knows (e.g., 'When to Use' section explaining obvious use cases, explaining what debounce means, explaining what passive event listeners do, explaining what turbo_permanent does). The 'Related Patterns' and 'Common Issues' sections add bulk without much actionable value. The testing section, while useful, makes the document very long.	1 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides fully executable, copy-paste ready code for the Stimulus controller, view integration (Slim templates), testing helpers, and system spec examples. All code is concrete and complete with specific file paths.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The implementation steps are numbered (1. Controller, 2. View Integration) and the testing workflow is clear, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints. For example, there's no step to verify the controller is properly registered, no verification that the debounce is working before moving to testing, and no feedback loop for debugging failed auto-saves beyond the 'Common Issues' section.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The entire skill is a monolithic document with everything inline — the controller code, view integration, testing controller, testing helper, system specs, common issues, and references are all in one file. The testing section alone could be a separate file, and the troubleshooting could be split out. No bundle files are provided to offload content to.	1 / 3
	Total	7 / 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: RoleModel/rolemodel-skills
Commit: 72e8136

Reviewed: 5 days 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.