CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

docusign-automation

Automate DocuSign tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): templates, envelopes, signatures, document management. Always search tools first for current schemas.

52

Quality

58%

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 ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/docusign-automation/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

56%Scale 1-5

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

This skill provides a reasonable overview of DocuSign automation workflows with clear tool sequences and useful domain-specific knowledge about GUIDs, status flows, and role mapping. However, it suffers from significant repetition (pitfalls repeated 2-3 times), lacks executable call examples with concrete syntax, and could be more concise by consolidating duplicated information. The workflow structure is good but missing explicit validation checkpoints for irreversible operations like sending envelopes.

Suggestions

Consolidate repeated pitfalls into a single 'Known Pitfalls' section and remove duplicates from individual workflow sections to reduce token usage by ~30%

Add at least one concrete MCP call example showing the exact JSON payload for creating and sending an envelope from a template, rather than just listing parameter names

Add explicit validation steps to workflows (e.g., 'Verify envelope creation succeeded by checking response for envelopeId before calling SEND_ENVELOPE')

Remove the vacuous 'When to Use' section at the end — it adds no information beyond what the title and description already convey

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is moderately verbose with repeated pitfalls across sections (e.g., 'role names are case-sensitive' appears in workflow 2, Common Patterns, and Known Pitfalls). The envelope status flow is repeated. The 'When to Use' section at the end is vacuous. However, much of the content is domain-specific knowledge Claude wouldn't inherently know.

3 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides tool names and parameter lists but no actual executable code or MCP call examples with concrete syntax. The 'Common Patterns' section uses pseudocode-like numbered steps rather than actual invocation examples. Key parameters are listed but without showing the exact call format or JSON payloads that would be copy-paste ready.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Workflows are clearly sequenced with labeled steps (Prerequisite, Required, Optional), and the envelope status flow diagram is helpful. However, there are no explicit validation/verification checkpoints or error recovery feedback loops — e.g., no 'verify envelope was created successfully before sending' or 'if creation fails, check role names and retry' steps. Since envelope sending is a somewhat destructive/irreversible operation, this is a minor gap but not severe enough to cap at 3 since individual steps are well-defined.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The content is a monolithic file with no references to external files, and at ~180 lines it contains significant repetition that could be better organized. The Known Pitfalls section largely duplicates pitfalls already mentioned in each workflow section. No bundle files exist to reference, but the content could benefit from splitting (e.g., a separate pitfalls/reference doc).

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 identifies a clear domain (DocuSign automation via Composio) and lists relevant capability areas, but lacks concrete action verbs and an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause. The operational instruction about searching tools first takes up space that could be better used for trigger guidance. It's functional but could be significantly improved with more specific actions and explicit selection criteria.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger phrases like 'Use when the user asks about DocuSign, e-signatures, sending documents for signing, or envelope status'.

Replace category nouns with concrete action verbs, e.g., 'Create and send envelopes, manage templates, track signature status, download signed documents'.

Include natural synonyms and variations like 'e-signature', 'electronic signature', 'sign documents', 'send for signing' to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (DocuSign via Rube MCP/Composio) and lists several areas (templates, envelopes, signatures, document management), but these are more like categories than concrete actions. It doesn't specify verbs like 'create', 'send', 'track', or 'fill'.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a reasonable 'what' (automate DocuSign tasks with specific categories listed) but lacks an explicit 'when' clause. The instruction to 'search tools first' is operational guidance rather than a trigger condition. No 'Use when...' clause is present, which caps this at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes good trigger terms like 'DocuSign', 'templates', 'envelopes', 'signatures', and 'document management' that users would naturally mention. Missing some natural variations like 'e-signature', 'sign documents', 'send for signing', or 'electronic signature'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Fairly distinct due to the specific mention of DocuSign, Rube MCP, and Composio. Minor overlap risk with generic document management skills, but the DocuSign specificity makes it mostly distinguishable.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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
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.