bash-defensive-patterns

Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts. Use when writing robust shell scripts, CI/CD pipelines, or system utilities requiring fault tolerance and safety.

1.09x

Quality

60%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.09x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/bash-defensive-patterns/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is bash-defensive-patterns in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

42%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 well-structured with useful use/don't-use and safety sections, but it provides almost no executable guidance — every concrete pattern is deferred to an external playbook file that does not exist in the bundle. Workflow steps lack validation checkpoints despite the skill covering destructive operations.

Suggestions

Inline at least one copy-paste-ready defensive snippet (e.g. `set -euo pipefail` with an `ERR`/`EXIT` trap and a logging function) so the skill is actionable without the external file.

Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint to the workflow (e.g. 'After enabling strict mode, run `bash -n script.sh` and execute against a dry-run input before real execution').

Fix the broken reference: either create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` (or move it under `references/`) or remove the reference and inline the key patterns; de-duplicate the single inline 'Refer to...' line versus the '## Resources' section.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient with clear sections, but the padded marketing opener ('Comprehensive guidance... to prevent common pitfalls and ensure reliability'), eight overlapping 'Use when' bullets, and a duplicated resource reference (stated both inline and again under '## Resources') could be tightened; not 4 because the redundancy is noticeable, not 2 because no concept-explanation padding is present.	3 / 5
Actionability	The Instructions are high-level hints only ('Enable strict mode and safe defaults', 'Validate inputs, quote variables', 'Add logging, error traps') with no executable code, concrete commands, or snippets (e.g. no `set -euo pipefail`, no trap example); all concrete guidance is deferred to an external file, matching the anchor for minimal concrete guidance missing the specific steps to execute.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A four-step sequence is present (confirm environment → enable strict mode → validate/quote → add logging/traps/tests), but there are no validation or verification checkpoints, and the Safety section flags destructive operations — per the rubric, a destructive/batch skill without validation checkpoints is capped at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized and the reference is one level deep and clearly signaled, but the referenced path `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist (no `resources/`, `references/`, `scripts/`, or `assets/` bundle directory is present), so navigation is broken; capped at 3 because a clearly signaled reference points at a missing file.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 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 well-formed description that clearly states both capability and trigger conditions with good natural keyword coverage. Its main weakness is that the stated action ('master techniques') is generic rather than enumerating the concrete defensive techniques the skill actually teaches.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('defensive Bash programming', 'production-grade scripts') and enumerates concrete application contexts (CI/CD pipelines, system utilities, fault tolerance), but the core action ('Master defensive... techniques') is generic rather than a concrete operation; not the 2 (domain only, minimal actions) because multiple specific contexts are named, and not the 4 (several specific concrete actions) because no discrete techniques are listed.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' ('Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts') and 'when' with a concrete 'Use when...' trigger clause enumerating scenarios; matches the anchor that requires both with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural keyword coverage — 'shell scripts', 'CI/CD pipelines', 'system utilities', 'Bash', 'fault tolerance' — terms a user would plausibly say; falls short of 5 because common synonyms/variations (e.g. 'automation scripts', 'shell', '.sh') are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Defensive Bash programming' is a fairly distinct niche with low conflict risk; not the 5 because the broad 'shell scripts' framing could still overlap with general shell-scripting skills.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
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/bash-defensive-patterns/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 22 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.