Name: bash-scripting
Rating: 56.00000000000001 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

bash-scripting

Bash scripting workflow for creating production-ready shell scripts with defensive patterns, error handling, and testing.

Quality

63%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

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-scripting/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is bash-scripting in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

61%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 content is a well-structured, actionable bash workflow with an executable template, but it is somewhat padded by repeated phase scaffolding and lacks the in-workflow validation checkpoints that destructive/batch scripting demands. Tightening the phase boilerplate and adding validate-then-proceed gates would lift both conciseness and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation checkpoints inside the workflow (e.g., after Phase 4 error handling: 'Run ShellCheck and Bats; only proceed when both pass') instead of relying on a post-hoc Quality Gates checklist.

Consolidate the repeated 'Skills to Invoke / Actions / Copy-Paste Prompts' scaffolding to reduce token padding across the seven phases.

Replace the '# Implementation' placeholder in the script template with a concrete minimal main() example so the template is fully copy-paste ready.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with bullet lists, but the seven-phase scaffolding (repeated 'Skills to Invoke / Actions / Copy-Paste Prompts' blocks) and trivial one-line copy-paste prompts add padding that could be tightened, fitting 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'.	3 / 5
Actionability	The script template is concrete and copy-paste ready ('set -euo pipefail', log/error/usage functions, main), and action lists are specific, but the '# Implementation' placeholder is a minor gap, fitting 'mostly executable guidance; concrete code with minor gaps'.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Seven phases are clearly sequenced with a final Quality Gates checklist, but the workflow targets destructive/batch contexts (deployment, backup, CI/CD) and lacks in-workflow validation checkpoints or validate-then-proceed feedback loops, capping workflow clarity at 3 per the guidelines.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The single self-contained file is well-organized (Overview, When to Use, 7 phases, Script Template, Quality Gates, Related) with clear sections and no nested references, fitting 'good structure; most content appropriately placed; minor organization gaps'.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 clearly states what the skill does and is reasonably specific and distinctive, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps its completeness. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms would raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers (e.g., 'Use when creating automation, deployment, backup, or CI/CD shell scripts').

Include natural synonyms and file extensions users say, such as '.sh', 'bash', and 'shell scripting'.

Tighten 'defensive patterns' toward user-natural phrasing like 'safe/robust shell scripts' to improve trigger-term quality.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the bash/shell domain and several concrete capabilities ('defensive patterns, error handling, and testing'), matching 'lists several specific actions; minor gaps' rather than the fully comprehensive coverage of a 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear ('creating production-ready shell scripts with defensive patterns, error handling, and testing') but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say ('Bash scripting', 'shell scripts', 'error handling', 'testing') but omits common synonyms and extensions like '.sh' or bare 'bash'/'shell', fitting 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Bash scripting workflow' carves a clear niche with low conflict risk, but the broad scope (automation, system admin, deployment, backup, CI/CD) creates minor overlap with related scripting skills, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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-scripting/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.