CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

writing-skills

Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment

59

1.29x
Quality

37%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.29x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

35%

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

This skill attempts to be a comprehensive guide for skill creation using a TDD methodology, and it contains genuinely useful patterns (CSO optimization, rationalization tables, description anti-patterns). However, it severely violates its own token efficiency advice—a skill about writing concise skills is itself extremely verbose and repetitive. The core workflow is clear but lacks concrete executable validation steps, and the massive inline content contradicts the progressive disclosure principles it advocates.

Suggestions

Cut content by at least 50%: remove the rationalization table (or move to a separate file), eliminate repeated statements of the Iron Law, compress the CSO section's good/bad examples to 1 each, and remove explanations of what TDD is (reference the TDD skill instead of re-explaining).

Add concrete, executable validation steps: specify exactly how to run a subagent pressure test (e.g., a specific command or prompt template) rather than deferring entirely to testing-skills-with-subagents.md.

Split into progressive disclosure structure: move the CSO deep-dive, rationalization bulletproofing, and testing-by-skill-type sections into separate reference files, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with cross-references.

Practice what you preach on word count: the skill recommends <500 words for non-getting-started skills but is 5x that length. Apply the compression techniques listed in the Token Efficiency section to this skill itself.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

This skill is extremely verbose at ~2500+ words. It explains concepts Claude already knows (what TDD is, what a skill is, basic file organization), includes extensive rationalization tables, repeats the same points multiple times ('Iron Law' stated 3+ times), and contains lengthy anti-pattern explanations. The CSO section alone could be cut by 60%. Much content is redundant with the referenced test-driven-development skill.

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete YAML frontmatter examples, directory structures, and a detailed checklist, which are actionable. However, the core workflow (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for skills) lacks executable commands or specific tool invocations for running pressure scenarios with subagents—it defers to another skill for the actual testing methodology. The checklist is good but the actual 'how to test' is abstract.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle is clearly sequenced and the final checklist provides good structure. However, validation checkpoints are weak—there's no concrete verification step for checking if a skill actually works beyond 'run scenarios WITH skill - verify agents now comply.' The 'STOP' section adds a checkpoint but lacks specific validation commands or criteria for what 'passing' looks like.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references several external files (testing-skills-with-subagents.md, anthropic-best-practices.md, persuasion-principles.md, graphviz-conventions.dot) which suggests good intent for progressive disclosure. However, no bundle files are provided, so we can't verify these exist. The main SKILL.md itself is monolithic—the CSO section, rationalization tables, and testing methodology could be split into separate reference files to reduce the massive inline content.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

40%

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 functions primarily as a 'when to use' clause without adequately explaining what the skill actually does. It lacks concrete actions (e.g., generating YAML frontmatter, validating skill structure, writing markdown instructions) and misses important trigger terms users might naturally use. The description is too thin to reliably distinguish this skill from general editing or file creation skills.

Suggestions

Add explicit 'what' capabilities such as 'Generates skill markdown files with proper YAML frontmatter, validates skill structure, and tests skill behavior' before the 'Use when' clause.

Include more natural trigger terms and file type references like 'skill.md', 'SKILL.md', 'skill file', 'skill template', 'write a skill', 'new skill definition'.

Specify the domain more precisely (e.g., 'Claude skills' or 'MCP skills') to reduce conflict risk with generic editing or creation tasks.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description uses vague language like 'creating', 'editing', and 'verifying' without specifying concrete actions. It doesn't explain what a 'skill' is, what creating one involves, or what verification entails.

1 / 3

Completeness

The description addresses 'when' with 'Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment', but the 'what' is only implied through the trigger conditions rather than explicitly stated as capabilities.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes some relevant keywords like 'skills', 'creating', 'editing', and 'deployment', but misses natural variations users might say such as 'skill.md', 'write a skill', 'skill file', 'test a skill', or 'skill template'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The term 'skills' provides some specificity to a niche domain, but without more detail about what kind of skills (e.g., markdown skill files, Claude skill definitions), it could overlap with general editing or creation tasks.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (656 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
aaddrick/claude-desktop-debian
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.