CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

golang-pro

Master Go 1.21+ with modern patterns, advanced concurrency, performance optimization, and production-ready microservices.

29

Quality

23%

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/antigravity-bundle-systems-programming/skills/golang-pro/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is golang-pro in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

10%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 is essentially a capability catalog or persona description rather than actionable instructions. It extensively lists topics Claude already knows (generics, gRPC, Docker, testing frameworks) without providing any concrete code, specific patterns, commands, or executable guidance. The content would need a fundamental restructuring to be useful—replacing topic lists with concrete examples, specific code patterns, and clear workflows.

Suggestions

Replace the bullet-point capability lists with concrete, executable code examples for the most important patterns (e.g., a complete worker pool implementation, a gRPC service skeleton, a profiling workflow with specific pprof commands).

Add specific validation and verification steps to the workflow—e.g., 'Run `go vet ./...` and `golangci-lint run` before committing' and 'Run `go test -race ./...` to detect race conditions'.

Remove sections that merely list things Claude already knows (Capabilities, Knowledge Base, Behavioral Traits) and replace with a concise quick-reference of Go 1.21+-specific patterns or gotchas that add genuine value.

If the skill is meant to cover this breadth, create bundle files for specific domains (CONCURRENCY_PATTERNS.md, TESTING.md, DEPLOYMENT.md) with concrete examples, and use SKILL.md as a brief overview pointing to them.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose and padded. The vast majority of content is bullet-point lists of concepts Claude already knows (what generics are, what gRPC is, what Docker is, etc.). The 'Capabilities', 'Knowledge Base', 'Behavioral Traits' sections are essentially restating Claude's existing knowledge. Almost no token earns its place—this reads like a resume, not actionable instructions.

1 / 5

Actionability

Contains zero concrete code examples, zero executable commands, and zero specific patterns. Everything is abstract description ('Channel patterns: fan-in, fan-out, worker pools'). The 'Instructions' section has four vague steps with no specifics. The 'Example Interactions' are just prompt suggestions, not worked examples with outputs.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Instructions' section provides a rough 4-step sequence (confirm version, choose patterns, implement, optimize) but steps are extremely vague with no validation checkpoints, no concrete commands, and no feedback loops. The 'Response Approach' is similarly abstract. No verification or error recovery steps exist.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, yet the skill is over 150 lines of flat bullet lists that would benefit enormously from being split into separate reference files (e.g., concurrency patterns, testing strategies, deployment guides). Everything is inlined in a monolithic structure with no cross-references. Section headers exist but content within them is just lists of topics rather than organized, navigable material.

2 / 5

Total

6

/

20

Passed

Description

36%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 reads more like a course title or marketing tagline than a functional skill description. It lacks concrete actions (what the skill does), has no 'Use when...' guidance, and relies on broad buzzwords like 'modern patterns' and 'production-ready' that don't help Claude distinguish when to select this skill. The Go 1.21+ version specificity is a minor strength but insufficient to compensate for the overall vagueness.

Suggestions

Replace vague category labels with concrete actions, e.g., 'Writes, reviews, and debugs Go code including goroutines, channels, error handling, and module management.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Go/Golang code, .go files, goroutines, channels, Go modules, or Go microservice architecture.'

Remove marketing-style language like 'Master' and 'production-ready' and use third-person action verbs describing what the skill does (e.g., 'Generates', 'Analyzes', 'Optimizes').

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (Go 1.21+) and mentions broad categories like 'concurrency', 'performance optimization', and 'microservices', but these are high-level buzzwords rather than concrete actions. No specific verbs describe what the skill actually does (e.g., 'generates Go code', 'reviews goroutine usage', 'profiles memory allocation').

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is vague — it lists broad topic areas but not concrete actions. There is no 'when' clause at all — no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, missing a 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3, and the weak 'what' brings it down to 2.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant keywords like 'Go', 'concurrency', 'microservices', and 'performance optimization' that users might mention. However, it misses natural variations like 'golang', 'goroutines', 'channels', 'Go modules', '.go files', or common user phrases like 'write Go code' or 'debug Go program'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Specifying 'Go 1.21+' provides some distinctiveness from other language skills, but terms like 'performance optimization', 'microservices', and 'concurrency' are generic enough to overlap with skills for other languages or general software engineering skills.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

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.