CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

googlesheets-automation

Automate Google Sheets operations (read, write, format, filter, manage spreadsheets) via Rube MCP (Composio). Read/write data, manage tabs, apply formatting, and search rows programmatically.

65

Quality

78%

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/skills/googlesheets-automation/SKILL.md

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

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 highly actionable, with concrete tool sequences, exact parameter formats, and well-structured sections; its main weaknesses are duplicated pitfalls across sections and verification steps that are present but not formalized into explicit feedback loops.

Suggestions

Consolidate the per-workflow "Pitfalls" subsections into the single "Known Pitfalls" section (or vice versa) to remove duplication and tighten token usage.

Promote scattered verification hints into explicit workflow checkpoints, e.g., a numbered "Verify" step after batch writes/deletes with a readback-then-fix retry loop for destructive operations.

Consider splitting the full tool/parameter Quick Reference into a separate references file and keeping SKILL.md as a tighter overview pointing to it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient and assumes competence, focusing on tool-specific gotchas rather than basic concepts, but pitfalls are duplicated (per-workflow sections and the "Known Pitfalls" section) and tool slugs repeat in the Quick Reference table — minor over-padded instances fitting the score-4 anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides exact tool slugs, parameter names, value formats (A1 notation, 0.0-1.0 float colors, 2D arrays), and numbered tool sequences that fully cover the common cases; for an instruction-only MCP-tool skill this is copy-paste-ready actionable guidance matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each core workflow has a clearly numbered tool sequence with verification hints ("verify placement", "verify formatting via readback", "double-check bounds", "confirm ACTIVE"); these are not absent so the batch/destructive cap does not apply, but they are scattered in pitfalls rather than structured as explicit validate->fix->retry loops, fitting score 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; the skill is self-contained with well-organized sections (Prerequisites, Setup, five Core Workflows, Common Patterns, Known Pitfalls, Quick Reference table) giving easy navigation, but the heavy inline tool reference and duplicated pitfalls are minor organization gaps that keep it at 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 is specific and distinctive, naming concrete actions and a clear niche via Rube MCP/Composio, but it omits any explicit "Use when..." trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3. Trigger-term coverage is good but lacks some natural synonyms users would say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause naming natural triggers, e.g., "Use when the user wants to read or write a Google Sheet, format cells, filter rows, or sync records into a spreadsheet."

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms users actually say, such as "rows", "cells", "tabs", and "spreadsheet data".

Drop the redundant second sentence ("Read/write data, manage tabs...") since the first sentence already enumerates these actions, improving conciseness without losing specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ("read, write, format, filter, manage spreadsheets"; "manage tabs, apply formatting, and search rows") with comprehensive coverage of the domain, matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear "what" but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance; per the rubric guideline, a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms "Google Sheets" and "spreadsheets" appear, but common synonyms a user might say ("rows", "cells", "tabs") are only weakly represented; good coverage with a few natural terms missing, fitting the score-4 anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Google Sheets ... via Rube MCP (Composio)" carves a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills, matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.