framework-migration-deps-upgrade

You are a dependency management expert specializing in safe, incremental upgrades of project dependencies. Plan and execute dependency updates with minimal risk, proper testing, and clear migration pa

Quality

51%

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/framework-migration-deps-upgrade/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is framework-migration-deps-upgrade in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

43%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 reasonably lean and sectioned but offers only vague, non-executable guidance for a risky operation, with no validation/rollback feedback loop. Its single external reference points to a file that does not exist.

Suggestions

Replace generic instructions with concrete, executable steps: specific commands for inspecting outdated deps (e.g., `npm outdated`, `pip list --outdated`), running the test suite, and verifying compatibility.

Add an explicit validation/feedback loop workflow: upgrade one dependency → run tests → if failing, revert and document — this is required for destructive/batch operations to exceed workflow_clarity 3.

Either create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md bundle file or remove/fix the dead reference, since it currently points to a non-existent path.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is largely lean with short sectioned bullets and no over-explanation of concepts Claude knows, though generic platitudes ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') are minor over-explanation that keeps it just below the fully-lean anchor 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is high-level and abstract ('Apply relevant best practices', 'Provide actionable steps and verification') with no concrete commands, code, or specific methods; the Output Format lists deliverables without executable steps, matching the 'minimal concrete guidance; missing specific steps' anchor.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	For a risky/destructive operation (dependency upgrades can break builds) the instructions offer only a vague sequence with no validation checkpoints or feedback loop, fitting the 'rough sequence, many gaps, validation absent' anchor and well below the destructive-operation cap of 3.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section structure is present and the body explicitly signals one external reference, but that reference (resources/implementation-playbook.md) points to a non-existent file and no bundle directory exists, so it sits between the broken-reference and well-organized anchors.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 concrete niche and several specific actions but is truncated and lacks an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, capping completeness. Trigger-term coverage is moderate, missing natural synonyms users would actually say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause stating the natural trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when upgrading or bumping project dependencies, resolving version conflicts, or planning breaking-change migrations').

Complete the truncated phrase and include natural synonyms users say: 'upgrade dependencies', 'bump packages', 'dependency versions', 'breaking changes'.

Switch from second-person ('You are a dependency management expert') to third-person voice ('Plans and executes safe, incremental dependency upgrades...') to align with the rubric's voice requirement.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions ("Plan and execute dependency updates with minimal risk, proper testing, and clear migration paths") with minor coverage gaps (no rollback, compatibility specifics), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the 1-2-action anchor 3.	4 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' (plan/execute safe dependency upgrades) but entirely lacks a 'Use when...' / trigger clause and is truncated mid-phrase, so per the missing-trigger-cap guideline it cannot exceed 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains relevant keywords ("dependency management", "dependency updates", "upgrades", "migration paths") but misses common natural variations users say ("bump dependencies", "update packages", "versions"), fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The dependency-upgrade niche is mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against general package-update tasks, fitting the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' anchor rather than the fully-clear-niche anchor 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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/framework-migration-deps-upgrade/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 4 days 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.