CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

multiplayer

Multiplayer game development principles. Architecture, networking, synchronization.

Quality

50%

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 ./skills/game-development/multiplayer/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

38%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-organized and compact in form, but it is a generic textbook reference rather than a skill: it restates networking fundamentals Claude already knows and provides no executable or engine-specific guidance. The noise 'When to Use' section adds no information and should be removed or made real.

Suggestions

Cut or drastically condense the already-known fundamentals (the Synchronization, Lag Compensation, and Bandwidth Reduction tables) and keep only non-obvious, opinionated guidance such as concrete tick rates, snapshot sizes, or decision rules with numbers.

Add at least one concrete implementation artifact — engine/library-specific examples, protocol snippets, or worked rollback/netcode code — so the skill instructs rather than describes.

Remove or rewrite the filler 'When to Use' section ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.') which conveys nothing; either state real applicability conditions or delete the section.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Although presented in compact tables, the bulk recites textbook concepts Claude already knows (prediction, interpolation, reconciliation, delta compression, area of interest, server-authority basics), and the closing 'When to Use' section is pure filler ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.'). This matches 'Noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections'; not a 1 because the table format avoids padded prose.

2 / 5

Actionability

No code, commands, or implementation specifics anywhere — rows like 'Prediction: Client predicts server' and 'Speed hack: Server validates movement' describe rather than instruct. The architecture decision tree is the only concrete mapping, matching 'Minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps'; not a 3 because there is no executable or even pseudocode-level detail.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The decision tree gives a clear selection flow and sections are numbered, but there are no step sequences, checkpoints, or feedback loops (none strictly required — no destructive or batch operations). This matches 'Steps listed but validation gaps; sequence present but checkpoints missing'; not a 4 because no checkpoints exist at all.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file skill with no bundle files, all content inline in one well-sectioned document with clear numbered headers — appropriate for ~130 lines. This matches 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed'; not a 5 because it exceeds the under-50-line single-file ideal and the filler 'When to Use' section detracts from organization.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

40%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 identifies a distinct niche but reads as a topic index rather than a capability statement: no actions, no 'use when' trigger guidance, and no natural trigger synonyms beyond the core domain words. It would rarely be selected at the right moment because users asking about 'netcode', 'lag', or 'anti-cheat' won't match its vocabulary.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when building multiplayer or networked games, or when the user mentions netcode, lag compensation, rollback, dedicated servers, or anti-cheat.'

Replace the topic-noun list with concrete actions the skill performs, e.g. 'Guides architecture selection, synchronization strategy, and server-authority design for multiplayer games.'

Include natural user vocabulary and synonyms (netcode, lag/ping, hit registration, server authority, matchmaking) so the description matches how users actually phrase these requests.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Multiplayer game development principles') and subtopics ('Architecture, networking, synchronization') but contains no action verbs or concrete capabilities — these are topic labels, matching 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It is not a 3 because no concrete actions like 'design', 'implement', or 'debug' are ever stated.

2 / 5

Completeness

There is no 'when to use' clause at all, and the 'what' is a vague noun-phrase list with no stated actions, matching 'Has a vague what and no when'. The missing-'Use when' cap (≤3) applies; it is not a 3 because the what is not action-stated as in 'Extract text and tables from PDF files, fill forms, merge documents'.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Real natural keywords are present ('multiplayer', 'game development', 'networking', 'synchronization') but common user phrasings are missing: 'netcode', 'lag compensation', 'rollback', 'anti-cheat', 'dedicated server', 'server authority'. This matches 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'; not a 4 because several frequently-used natural terms are absent.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Multiplayer game development' is a clear niche, and the generic words 'architecture' and 'networking' create only minor overlap risk with general game-dev or networking skills. This matches 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'; not a 5 because the generic trailing terms and absence of explicit triggers leave some pull toward adjacent domains.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 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

Path

skills/game-development/multiplayer/SKILL.md

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.