CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

basecamp-automation

Automate Basecamp project management, to-dos, messages, people, and to-do list organization via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.

48

Quality

51%

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 ./skills/basecamp-automation/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

44%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 skill provides comprehensive coverage of Basecamp operations with clear tool sequences and useful pitfall documentation, but suffers from significant verbosity through repeated information across sections (pitfalls, ID format notes, alternative tools). It lacks concrete executable examples showing actual tool invocations with sample payloads, and all content is crammed into a single file when the volume of reference material warrants splitting into supporting files.

Suggestions

Extract the quick reference table and detailed parameter lists into a separate REFERENCE.md file, keeping only the workflow sequences and key pitfalls in SKILL.md

Remove the duplicated 'Known Pitfalls' section at the bottom since each workflow already has its own pitfalls subsection, or consolidate all pitfalls into one location only

Add at least one concrete example per workflow showing an actual tool invocation with sample parameters and a representative response snippet

Reduce repetition of alternative/fallback tools — mention them once in the quick reference table rather than in every workflow section

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is significantly verbose with extensive repetition. The 'Known Pitfalls' section at the bottom largely repeats pitfalls already listed under each workflow. The quick reference table duplicates information from the workflow sections. Alternative/fallback tools are mentioned repeatedly. Many parameter descriptions (e.g., explaining that bucket_id is an integer) are restated across multiple sections. The skill could be cut by 40-50% without losing actionable information.

2 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides concrete tool names, parameter lists, and clear sequencing of API calls, which is useful. However, there are no executable code examples or concrete input/output examples showing actual payloads or responses. The guidance is specific about which tools to call and what parameters to pass, but lacks copy-paste ready examples of actual tool invocations with sample data.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Workflows are clearly sequenced with numbered steps and labeled annotations ([Prerequisite], [Required], [Optional], [Alternative]). The ID resolution pattern provides a clear top-down hierarchy. However, validation/verification steps are mostly absent — there's no explicit 'verify the to-do list was created' or error recovery steps. Since these are API operations (not destructive batch operations), the missing validation doesn't trigger the cap at 3, but it's still a gap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

All content is inlined in a single monolithic file with no references to supporting files. The quick reference table, detailed parameter lists, and extensive pitfall documentation could be split into separate reference files. For a skill of this length (~200+ lines), the lack of any content separation is a notable organizational weakness. The description says to 'always search tools first for current schemas,' which somewhat mitigates the need for detailed parameter docs inline, yet they're all included anyway.

2 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 does a reasonable job identifying the domain (Basecamp) and listing several concrete capability areas, making it fairly specific and distinctive. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for Claude's skill selection, and the trigger terms could be expanded to include more natural user language and synonyms.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Basecamp projects, tasks, to-do lists, messages, or team management.'

Include natural synonyms and variations users might say, such as 'tasks', 'assignments', 'team members', 'comments', 'campfire chat', or 'Basecamp 3/4'.

Expand the action verbs to be more specific—e.g., 'create, update, and delete to-dos; post messages; manage team members' instead of the generic 'automate'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific actions/domains: 'project management, to-dos, messages, people, and to-do list organization.' Also mentions the tool integration (Rube MCP/Composio) and includes a procedural note about searching tools first. Minor gaps in coverage—doesn't enumerate all possible actions like creating, updating, deleting.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is reasonably clear (automate Basecamp project management tasks), but there is no explicit 'when' clause. There's no 'Use when...' guidance telling Claude when to select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'Basecamp', 'to-dos', 'messages', 'people', and 'project management', but misses natural user phrases like 'tasks', 'comments', 'campfire', 'schedule', or variations users might say. 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon unlikely to be used by end users.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Mentioning 'Basecamp' specifically and the integration method (Rube MCP/Composio) makes this fairly distinct. Minor overlap risk with generic project management skills, but the Basecamp specificity reduces conflict significantly.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
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.