CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

linux-troubleshooting

Linux system troubleshooting workflow for diagnosing and resolving system issues, performance problems, and service failures.

54

Quality

61%

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/linux-troubleshooting/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%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 well-structured into sequenced phases with genuinely executable commands, but it lacks validation/feedback checkpoints for destructive operations and is a monolithic single file with no progressive disclosure. Conciseness suffers from repetitive phase boilerplate.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation gates before destructive steps (e.g., confirm root cause before restarting a service; verify connectivity before config changes).

Tighten the repeated per-phase boilerplate and replace the trivial single-line "Copy-Paste Prompts" with more useful guidance or remove them.

Split detailed command catalogs into a reference file and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview pointing to it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Content is terse per phase (action lists + command blocks), but the seven-phase boilerplate structure and near-trivial single-line "Copy-Paste Prompts" add redundancy that could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Each phase provides concrete, copy-paste-ready commands (uptime, top, ps, journalctl, ss, strace), with minor gaps where targets are placeholders (http://target, service).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Phases are clearly sequenced with end checklists, but the workflow includes destructive/batch operations (strace, systemctl restart) with no validation checkpoints or feedback loops, capping this dimension at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single well-headed self-contained file with no bundle files or external references; structure is decent but everything is inlined with no progressive disclosure to deeper material.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 clearly conveys what the skill does across several concrete issue categories but omits any explicit "when to use" trigger guidance, which caps completeness. Trigger terms and distinctiveness are solid though not comprehensive.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause naming concrete triggers (e.g., slow system, high CPU/memory, service won't start, OOM kills).

Broaden trigger-term coverage with synonyms users actually say ("slow server", "high load", "OOM", "service down").

Mention network and disk-space issues in the description to match the body's scope.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the Linux troubleshooting domain plus several concrete action categories ("diagnosing and resolving system issues, performance problems, and service failures"), with only minor coverage gaps; not comprehensive enough for a 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clearly stated but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the rubric completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes several natural multi-word phrases users would say ("Linux system troubleshooting", "system issues", "performance problems", "service failures"), but misses common synonyms/variations like "slow server" or "high CPU".

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Linux system-troubleshooting niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, with only minor overlap risk against general bash/devops skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.