docs-workflows

Documentation and extension workflows derived from local slash commands (docs, explanation, issues, prototypes, tutorials, MCP design review).

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/docs-workflows/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

80%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, token-efficient overview that delegates detail to real, one-level-deep reference files with clear navigation. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: the execution steps lack any validation or verification checkpoint to confirm template adherence before finishing.

Suggestions

Add a validation step to the execution rules, e.g., "Verify the output includes all required fields from the template before finalizing."

Inline a compact trigger-to-template mapping (or a one-line hint) so Claude can select the right reference without a second file hop.

State the expected output location/contract per workflow type so the "apply the template" step is unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean — a one-line intro, a short trigger bullet list, a reference index, four terse execution rules, and a single pointer to the command catalog — with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the "every token earns its place" anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Execution rules give concrete procedural guidance (read the relevant template, apply its structure and required fields as the output contract, keep edits minimal, respect repo doc locations), but the selection of which template maps to which trigger is delegated one hop to command-catalog.md, leaving a minor gap.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence is present (read template, apply structure, keep minimal, prefer clarity) but there are no validation or verification checkpoints (e.g., confirm output matches the template's required fields), matching the "steps listed but checkpoints missing" anchor.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references — a "Source of truth" index of reference files and a pointer to command-catalog.md — and all referenced files exist, matching the "clear overview with one-level-deep references" anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

52%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 conveys a clear scope and several natural trigger terms but lacks any concrete action verbs and omits an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, capping its completeness. It is reasonably distinct in its niche portions yet broad enough in the docs/tutorials areas to risk overlap.

Suggestions

Add concrete action verbs to the description (e.g., "Create and standardize documentation, draft issues, design prototypes, add tutorials, and run MCP design reviews").

Append an explicit "Use when..." clause listing natural trigger phrases (e.g., "Use when the user asks to write docs, draft an issue, plan a prototype, add a tutorial, or review MCP design").

Sharpen distinctiveness by leading with the more niche triggers (MCP design review, skill/command/IDE templates) before the broad "docs" term.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and enumerates sub-areas ("docs, explanation, issues, prototypes, tutorials, MCP design review") but describes no concrete actions — "workflows" is a noun and "derived from local slash commands" states origin, not capability, so it sits below the midpoint between anchor 2 and 3.	2 / 5
Completeness	A clear "what" is present (documentation and extension workflows for the listed areas) but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like "docs", "issues", "prototypes", "tutorials", and "MCP design review" are natural phrases a user would say, giving good keyword coverage, though common variations such as "documentation", "spec", or "template" are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The MCP design review and skill/command/IDE extension portions are niche, but "docs" and "tutorials" are broad enough to overlap with other documentation skills, matching the "somewhat specific but could still overlap" anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 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: TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit
Path: skills/docs-workflows/SKILL.md
Commit: f07c33c

Reviewed: 4 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.