sqlitecpp-workflow

SQLiteCpp workflow for branches, implementation, tests, commits, pull requests, and CHANGELOG updates. Use when changing the repository.

Quality

73%

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 ./.claude/skills/sqlitecpp-workflow/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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 well-structured, actionable workflow doc with concrete paths, commands, and validation gates, assuming Claude's competence without padding. Its only notable weaknesses are mild repetition of the CHANGELOG-commit rule and the absence of an explicit build-failure feedback loop.

Suggestions

Add a short 'If the build or tests fail' feedback loop (fix -> rebuild -> re-run tests -> only then commit) to lift workflow_clarity to 5.

Consolidate the 'separate CHANGELOG commit' rule into one authoritative location and reference it from the other sections to remove redundancy.

Since branch naming is delegated to the unbundled sqlitecpp-git-branching skill, add a one-line summary of the expected branch-name format inline so the workflow is self-contained.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no explanations of git or SQLiteCpp), but the 'separate CHANGELOG commit' rule is restated in three sections (checklist, CHANGELOG conventions, Git commits), which is minor redundancy that could be trimmed — score 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete guidance throughout: specific commands ('gh pr create'), exact file paths ('include/SQLiteCpp/<Class>.h', 'src/<Class>.cpp', 'tests/<Class>_test.cpp'), and literal CHANGELOG bullet formats ('- <description> (#NNN)'); minor gaps such as no full commit command or branch-naming spec keep it at 4.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear numbered 5-step required workflow plus a 4-step CHANGELOG workflow, with validation checkpoints ('Build and run the relevant tests', each commit must compile/pass tests) and a destructive-operation gate (ask permission before pushing); lacks an explicit validate->fix->retry feedback loop, so score 4 not 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist, and the single-file body is well-organized with clear section headers and well-signaled one-level cross-skill references ([[sqlitecpp-release]], sqlitecpp-git-branching, humanizer); at ~85 lines it slightly exceeds the under-50 simple-skill exception, so score 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

72%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 specific and comprehensive about what the skill does, with a clear SQLiteCpp niche. Its main weakness is a broad, generic trigger phrase that could be sharpened with more natural user-facing terms.

Suggestions

Expand the trigger clause with natural phrases users actually say, e.g. 'Use when adding or modifying SQLiteCpp methods/classes, writing tests, opening pull requests, or updating the CHANGELOG'.

Add file-extension or artifact keywords (e.g. 'CMakeLists.txt', 'meson.build', 'CHANGELOG.md') to improve trigger-term coverage and distinctiveness.

Tighten the 'when' to the concrete actions a user would request rather than the generic 'changing the repository'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions — 'branches, implementation, tests, commits, pull requests, and CHANGELOG updates' — giving comprehensive coverage of the workflow's capabilities, matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
Completeness	Clearly states the 'what' (SQLiteCpp workflow for branches, implementation, tests, commits, PRs, CHANGELOG) and the 'when' ('Use when changing the repository'), but the trigger could be more specific, matching the score-4 anchor rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The only trigger phrase is 'Use when changing the repository', which is broad; domain terms like 'commits' and 'pull requests' are present but natural user variations (e.g. 'add a method', 'open a PR', 'commit my changes') are missing, fitting the score-3 anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'what' is tightly scoped to SQLiteCpp, but the trigger 'Use when changing the repository' is generic enough to overlap with other repo-editing skills, placing it at score 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 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: SRombauts/SQLiteCpp
Path: .claude/skills/sqlitecpp-workflow/SKILL.md
Commit: 672a1e0

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.