CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

clarvia-aeo-check

Score any MCP server, API, or CLI for agent-readiness using Clarvia AEO (Agent Experience Optimization). Search 15,400+ indexed tools before adding them to your workflow.

Quality

80%

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/clarvia-aeo-check/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 lean, highly actionable usage guide: copy-paste configuration, concrete prompts for every capability, a score-interpretation table, and problem/solution pitfalls that double as error-recovery guidance. Its only real weaknesses are minor redundancy between the How-It-Works steps and the Examples section, and the absence of an explicit validation checkpoint before acting on scores.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient with no filler explanations of concepts Claude already knows, but has minor trim opportunities: the Overview restates the frontmatter description, and Example 1 ('score it... tell me if it's agent-ready') largely duplicates How-It-Works Step 1.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable and copy-paste ready: the exact MCP server config JSON, concrete prompts for each usage mode ('Score https://github.com/example/my-mcp-server...', 'Compare supabase-mcp vs firebase-mcp...'), a GitHub Action YAML with a fail-under threshold, and named tools ('aeo_score', 'get_score_breakdown') covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The four usage patterns are clearly sequenced and labeled, and Common Pitfalls provides error recovery ('not found' → scan by URL directly; low score → 'get_score_breakdown') plus a re-check loop in Best Practices. It stops short of anchor 5 because there is no explicit verification checkpoint for acting on a score before adding a tool to production.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a single-file skill (no bundle directories exist) with well-organized, clearly headed sections and no buried or nested references. Content is appropriately placed inline for a skill of this size, though at ~120 lines the examples and score-interpretation table could eventually justify splitting out.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 solid description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with good natural trigger terms for the MCP/API/CLI evaluation context. It falls short of top marks on specificity (only two of the tool's capabilities are named) and on the explicit 'Use when...' trigger-phrase pattern.

Suggestions

Add one or two more concrete actions to the description (e.g., 'Compare tools head-to-head and browse leaderboards of top-rated options') to raise specificity from naming 1-2 actions to several.

Append an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when evaluating, comparing, or choosing MCP servers, APIs, or CLIs for agent workflows' to strengthen completeness and capture natural trigger phrases like 'evaluate' and 'compare'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("MCP server, API, or CLI") and exactly two concrete actions — "Score any MCP server... for agent-readiness" and "Search 15,400+ indexed tools" — which matches the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage (compare, leaderboard, and score-breakdown capabilities are absent).

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is explicit ("Score any MCP server, API, or CLI for agent-readiness... Search 15,400+ indexed tools") and the 'when' is explicitly stated via "before adding them to your workflow", so both are present but the 'when' lacks the fuller 'Use when...' trigger-phrase form of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms users would say are present ("MCP server", "API", "CLI", "agent-readiness", "score", "tools"), giving good keyword coverage across tool types and the task; a few common variations like "evaluate", "compare", or "tool quality" are missing, keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche (agent-readiness scoring via Clarvia with "15,400+ indexed tools") with distinct triggers like "agent-readiness" and "Clarvia AEO", but there is minor overlap risk with generic tool-evaluation and MCP-configuration skills — the body itself lists a related "@agent-evaluation" framework.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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

skills/clarvia-aeo-check/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.