cc-skill-project-guidelines-example

Project Guidelines Skill (Example)

Quality

25%

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 ./skills/cc-skill-project-guidelines-example/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is cc-skill-project-guidelines-example in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Quality

Content

50%Scale 1-3

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

This skill is highly actionable with concrete, executable code examples and clear project structure, but it suffers significantly from verbosity—inlining extensive boilerplate patterns that Claude already knows (generic API responses, fetch wrappers, custom hooks). The content would be far more effective as a lean overview with references to detailed pattern files, rather than a monolithic document. The deployment workflow lacks validation/feedback loops.

Suggestions

Move detailed code patterns (API response format, fetch utility, custom hooks, Claude integration) into the referenced files (backend-patterns.md, frontend-patterns.md) and keep only project-specific deviations or one-line summaries in SKILL.md.

Remove the 'When to Use' section and architecture diagram ASCII art—replace with a brief 2-line tech stack summary. Claude doesn't need to be told what project skills contain.

Add validation/feedback loops to the deployment workflow: e.g., 'After deploy, verify with `curl https://api.example.com/health` and confirm 200 response before proceeding.'

Trim generic testing boilerplate (pytest fixtures, RTL patterns) that Claude already knows—instead, document only project-specific testing conventions or custom test utilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at ~250+ lines. Much of this is boilerplate code patterns (generic API response wrappers, custom hooks, fetch utilities) that Claude already knows how to write. The architecture diagram, while nice, adds significant token cost. The 'When to Use' section explains what project skills are, which is unnecessary meta-commentary.	1 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides fully executable, copy-paste ready code examples across Python, TypeScript, and bash. Deployment commands, test commands, and environment variable templates are all concrete and specific.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The deployment workflow has a checklist and commands, but lacks validation checkpoints and feedback loops. There's no 'if build fails, do X' guidance, no verification step after deployment (e.g., smoke test), and the testing section doesn't integrate into a clear development workflow sequence.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References to related skills (coding-standards.md, backend-patterns.md, etc.) are listed at the bottom, which is good. However, the massive inline code examples for API patterns, hooks, Claude integration, and testing could be split into those referenced files. The SKILL.md itself is a monolithic wall of code examples that should be overviews pointing to detailed materials.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

0%Scale 1-3

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This description is essentially a placeholder title with no functional content. It fails on every dimension: it provides no concrete actions, no trigger terms, no 'when to use' guidance, and no distinguishing characteristics. It would be unusable for skill selection in a multi-skill environment.

Suggestions

Replace the placeholder with a description of concrete actions, e.g., 'Enforces project-specific coding standards, naming conventions, and directory structure rules.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about project conventions, coding standards, style guidelines, or repository structure.'

Include specific keywords users would naturally say, such as 'coding standards', 'style guide', 'naming conventions', 'project rules', 'repo structure'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description 'Project Guidelines Skill (Example)' provides no concrete actions whatsoever. It names a vague domain ('Project Guidelines') but describes nothing about what the skill actually does.	1 / 3
Completeness	Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent guidance for skill selection.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	There are no natural keywords a user would say. 'Project Guidelines' is generic and '(Example)' suggests this is a placeholder, not a real description. No actionable trigger terms are present.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is extremely generic and could conflict with any skill related to projects, guidelines, standards, or documentation. There is nothing to distinguish it from other skills.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
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
Path: skills/cc-skill-project-guidelines-example/SKILL.md
Commit: 7520423

Reviewed: ~15 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.