CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

review-strict

Perform a strict, evidence-based review of the current branch or working-tree changes without modifying files. Use when the user asks for a strict review, deep review, senior review, merge assessment, or explicitly invokes `$review-strict`.

Quality

91%

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

100%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 body is an exemplary lean instruction skill: fully actionable output specifications, a coherent review workflow with an explicit self-disproof validation step, and zero padding. Its brevity is a strength — nothing should be added or moved to external files at this size.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every line instructs and nothing explains concepts Claude already knows; even the verification directive ('Try to disprove the finding before retaining it') earns its place. This matches the lean, competence-assuming anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

As an instruction-only skill the absence of code is not penalized, and the guidance is fully concrete: 'Cite the file and exact line', 'State the concrete trigger as input or state -> incorrect behavior', enumerated severity tiers ('blocking, important, optional'), and an enumerated merge-verdict set. No executability gaps remain.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is clear (diff first, unchanged code only when needed, prioritized categories, per-finding procedure, severity ordering, single merge verdict) with an explicit validation checkpoint ('Try to disprove the finding before retaining it') and a defined no-findings path. The skill is read-only, so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundle exists, and none is referenced), and the body is well-organized with a title, numbered priorities, a per-finding checklist, and closing constraints — the simple-skill case that scores 5.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 strong description with an explicit and well-phrased 'Use when' trigger clause and clear scope constraints. The main weakness is that the 'what' names only one action, leaving the concrete outputs of the skill (cited findings, severity ordering, merge verdict) undescribed.

Suggestions

Expand the 'what' clause with 2-3 concrete actions, e.g. 'cite file and line for each finding, order findings by severity, and end with a merge assessment'.

Add common natural trigger variations such as 'code review' or 'review my changes/PR' to the 'Use when' clause to broaden keyword coverage.

Clarify what distinguishes this from a plain review skill (e.g. 'stricter and more evidence-demanding than a standard review') to further reduce overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('current branch or working-tree changes') with one concrete action ('strict, evidence-based review') and a constraint ('without modifying files'), matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor. It does not list several specific actions, so anchor 4 is not reached.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Perform a strict, evidence-based review of the current branch or working-tree changes without modifying files') and when ('Use when the user asks for a strict review, deep review, senior review, merge assessment, or explicitly invokes $review-strict') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 pattern.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-keyword coverage with synonyms ('strict review, deep review, senior review, merge assessment') plus an explicit invocation alias ('$review-strict'). Common variations like 'code review' or 'review my PR' are missing, keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The strict/deep/senior qualifiers and the $review-strict invocation carve a mostly distinct niche with unambiguous triggers, but code review is a crowded skill domain where a bare 'review' request conceptually overlaps with a general review skill.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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

UniClipboard/UniClipboard

Path

.agents/skills/review-strict/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.