CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

azure-ai-document-intelligence-java

Build document analysis applications using the Azure AI Document Intelligence SDK for Java.

Quality

64%

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 ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/azure-ai-document-intelligence-java/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is azure-ai-document-intelligence-java in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%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 a solid, code-dense API reference: nearly everything is executable Java with minimal fluff, covering prebuilt models, custom models, classification, and errors. Its main weaknesses are the lack of any explicit workflow sequencing or validation steps (including for destructive model operations) and a monolithic single-file structure that would benefit from splitting advanced topics into reference files, plus a couple of filler sections.

Suggestions

Split advanced material (custom model build/compose/manage, document classification) into a references/ file (e.g., custom-models.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with clearly signaled links — the whole API surface is currently inlined in one ~340-line file.

Add explicit validation checkpoints around risky operations, e.g., verify a custom model's training status and list/get the model before deleteDocumentModel, and include a poller status/timeout check before getFinalResult().

Remove the filler "When to Use" sentence and the "Trigger Phrases" section (trigger guidance belongs in the description), and make code snippets self-contained by defining variables like receiptUrl and containerUrl or noting them as placeholders.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and code-first with almost no concept explanation, but a few things could be trimmed: the redundant "Trigger Phrases" section, the vacuous "When to Use" line ("This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview."), and the pinned dependency version (1.0.1). Fits anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed") rather than 5 because of that padding and the time-sensitive version number.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, mostly copy-paste-ready Java covers client creation (key and DefaultAzureCredential), prebuilt model analysis, custom model build/compose/manage, classification, and error handling — clearly anchor 4. It falls short of 5 due to minor gaps: undefined variables (receiptUrl, containerUrl, documentUrl), missing imports in later snippets, and unverified SDK method signatures (e.g., beginBuildDocumentModel argument order).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Sections imply a progression (Installation → Client Creation → Prebuilt Models → Custom Models → Classification → Error Handling) but there is no explicit sequencing, and validation checkpoints are absent — including for the destructive deleteDocumentModel call, which caps the score at 3 per the rubric's feedback-loop rule. Not score 4 because checkpoints are missing rather than merely minor.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Headers are clear and well-ordered, but the entire ~340-line API reference lives inline in SKILL.md with no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ do not exist). Custom model training, classifier building, and model management are reference-grade material that could be split out, matching anchor 3 ("content that should be separate is inline") rather than 4, which requires most bulk content in separate files.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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 short and accurately names a specific niche (Azure AI Document Intelligence for Java), but its single action verb is generic and it omits any "when to use" guidance. Adding concrete capabilities (layout/table extraction, invoice/receipt analysis, custom model training) plus a trigger clause would move it firmly into the good-example range.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 concrete capabilities to the description, e.g., "Extract text, tables, and key-value pairs from documents; analyze invoices and receipts; train custom models" — this raises specificity from naming the domain to listing real actions.

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when the user mentions Azure Document Intelligence, OCR, or extracting text/tables from PDFs, invoices, or receipts in Java" — this lifts completeness above the rubric's cap of 3 for missing 'when' guidance.

Include natural synonyms users actually say (OCR, PDF extraction, form processing) so trigger_term_quality covers common variations rather than only the product name.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain precisely ("Azure AI Document Intelligence SDK for Java") but the only action offered is the generic "Build document analysis applications", mirroring the score-2 anchor "Processes PDF files". It does not reach score 3 because no concrete capability (extract text, analyze invoices, train custom models) is stated.

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clearly stated (build document analysis apps with this SDK), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which the rubric caps at 3. Not score 4 because the "when" is entirely missing rather than merely imprecise.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "document analysis", "Java", and "Azure AI Document Intelligence" are relevant keywords a user might say, but common variations and synonyms (OCR, extract text from PDF, invoice, receipt, form processing) are absent. This matches anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms") rather than 4, which requires near-complete natural-term coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Azure + Document Intelligence + Java niche is highly specific with minimal conflict risk, fitting anchor 4 ("Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills", e.g., other Azure SDK or language-specific document skills). Not 5 because the description itself carries no distinct trigger phrases to fully disambiguate.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Path

plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/azure-ai-document-intelligence-java/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.