CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-documentation-doc-generate

You are a documentation expert specializing in creating comprehensive, maintainable documentation from code. Generate API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references using AI-powered analysis and industry best practices.

42

Quality

43%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/code-documentation-doc-generate/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

36%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 skill body is well-sectioned and brief, but its instructions are abstract rather than executable and lack a sequenced workflow with validation. The single referenced playbook file is broken (path 'resources/' with no corresponding bundle directory), undermining progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Replace abstract instructions with concrete, executable guidance: name specific tools/commands and include a copy-paste-ready doc-generation or linter example.

Number the workflow steps and add a validation checkpoint (e.g. 'validate generated docs against the code before finalizing').

Fix the broken reference: create references/implementation-playbook.md and update the path (or inline the essential examples) so the signaled detail file actually resolves.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly terse bullets with no concept-overexplaining, but the opening line duplicates the frontmatter description verbatim and 'Context' carries mild filler ('living documentation that stays synchronized with code'), so it is not fully lean.

3 / 5

Actionability

Instructions are abstract ('Extract information from code', 'Add automation (linting, CI)') with no concrete code, commands, tool names, or examples — it only describes rather than instructs, with minimal concrete guidance.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The instructions are an unordered 4-bullet list with no explicit sequencing, numbering, or validation checkpoints; the steps are vaguely defined and lack any feedback loop.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is sectioned and signals a one-level-deep reference ('resources/implementation-playbook.md'), but that file does not exist and the path uses 'resources/' rather than a bundle directory, so the reference is broken and detailed content is simply missing.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

50%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 conveys a clear capability and lists concrete deliverable types, but it omits any 'Use when...' trigger guidance, leans on role/second-person voice, and relies on buzzword filler ('AI-powered analysis', 'industry best practices'). Trigger phrasing a user would naturally say is largely absent.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when generating API docs, architecture diagrams, or user guides from a codebase'.

Switch to third-person voice ('Generates comprehensive documentation from code') to match the rubric's preferred voice.

Drop buzzword filler ('AI-powered analysis', 'industry best practices') in favor of natural user phrases like 'document my code' or 'generate API documentation'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and lists several concrete deliverables ('API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references'), but the description uses second-person voice ('You are a documentation expert'), which the rubric penalizes by reducing specificity by one, bringing a 4 down to 3.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' (generate comprehensive documentation from code) but has no 'Use when...' trigger clause; per the judging guidelines a missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords are present ('documentation', 'API docs', 'architecture diagrams', 'user guides', 'code') but natural phrases a user would actually say ('document my code', 'generate API docs') and synonyms/file extensions are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Documentation generation from code' is a recognizable niche but broad, with overlap risk against general doc, init, or code-review skills and no distinct trigger phrase to reduce conflict.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

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.

Validation15 / 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
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.