CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

validate-data

Validate whether an analysis is accurate, well-supported, and ready to share or use for a decision. Use when reviewing methodology, calculations, comparisons, visuals, caveats, or conclusions.

66

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./packages/opencode/src/skill/builtin/.bundle/data-analytics/workflows/validate-data/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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.

A comprehensive, highly actionable validation skill with strong checklists, concrete spot-check recipes, and a clear output template. The main weakness is redundancy between the Workflow and Standards sections plus some explanation of concepts Claude already knows, which inflates the token budget.

Suggestions

Collapse the overlap between the 8-step Workflow and the Standards checklists — either let the workflow reference the checklists by name instead of restating them, or merge the per-step detail into the corresponding checklist section.

Tighten Common Pitfalls to skip explaining well-known concepts (join explosion, survivorship bias, average of averages) and keep only the concrete detection/remediation action, e.g. 'Compare row counts and distinct primary entities before and after joins; aggregate the right-hand table to grain first.'.

Consider externalizing the Visualization Checks and Spot-Check Recipes into a reference file so the SKILL.md body stays a lean overview, improving progressive disclosure for a skill of this length.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and mostly substantive, but the 8-step Workflow narrative and the Standards checklists cover overlapping ground (e.g., step 3 vs Data Quality Checks, step 4 vs Calculation Checks), and the Common Pitfalls section explains concepts Claude already knows (join explosion, survivorship bias, average of averages), so it could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, specific checks and recipes ('Compare row counts and distinct primary entities before and after the join', 'use COUNT(DISTINCT primary_id)', 'Recompute a key metric from raw numerators and denominators'), explicit tool routing, and a copy-ready output template; for an instruction-only QA skill the guidance is fully actionable.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 8-step workflow backed by extensive checklists, with a feedback mechanism in step 8 separating blockers from caveats; however, there are no explicit inter-step validation gates, so it sits just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single SKILL.md is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Workflow, Standards subsections, Output Standards) with no nested or buried references, and no bundle files exist to point to; some checklist material could be externalized but the inline structure is solid.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 that clearly answers both 'what' and 'when' with concrete, natural trigger terms and a well-scoped validation niche. Minor gains are possible from adding more action verbs and synonyms to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the validation domain and several concrete review targets ('methodology, calculations, comparisons, visuals, caveats, or conclusions'), but the underlying action set is essentially one verb (validate/review) applied across domains, leaving minor coverage gaps relative to a fully comprehensive action list.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly states both what it does ('Validate whether an analysis is accurate, well-supported, and ready to share or use for a decision') and when to use it via a concrete 'Use when reviewing...' trigger clause, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user-facing terms ('reviewing methodology, calculations, comparisons, visuals, caveats, or conclusions') that a stakeholder would plausibly say, but misses common synonyms like 'numbers', 'charts', 'findings', or 'report'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The analysis-QA niche (reviewing methodology, conclusions, visuals) is mostly distinct from raw data profiling, but there is minor overlap risk with the closely related $analyze-data-quality companion skill on data-quality checks.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code
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.