CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

nestjs-expert

You are an expert in Nest.js with deep knowledge of enterprise-grade Node.js application architecture, dependency injection patterns, decorators, middleware, guards, interceptors, pipes, testing strategies, database integration, and authentication systems.

32

Quality

27%

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/skills/nestjs-expert/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

27%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 severely over-engineered and verbose, reading more like a comprehensive Nest.js reference manual than a focused skill instruction. While it contains some useful patterns and concrete code examples, the sheer volume (~400+ lines) of inlined content—including 17 problem-specific approaches, 5 decision trees, checklists, and external resource lists—makes it extremely inefficient for context window usage. The content would benefit enormously from aggressive trimming and splitting into referenced bundle files.

Suggestions

Reduce the SKILL.md to under 100 lines focusing on the core workflow (detect → diagnose → fix → validate), and move the 17 problem-specific approaches, decision trees, and checklists into separate bundle files like COMMON_PROBLEMS.md and PATTERNS.md.

Remove all explanatory content Claude already knows (what modules are, what DI is, basic Nest.js concepts) and external documentation links that Claude can reference independently.

Cut the decision trees, performance optimization, and code review checklist sections entirely or move them to optional reference files—these are generic Nest.js knowledge, not skill-specific instructions.

Add explicit error recovery loops to the main workflow, e.g., 'If typecheck fails after fix → re-analyze the error → apply alternative solution from problem patterns → re-validate.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. Extensively explains concepts Claude already knows (what modules are, what dependency injection is, basic Nest.js architecture). Includes massive lists of GitHub issues, decision trees for basic architectural choices, external resource links to official docs, and a 'success metrics' section that adds no actionable value. The content reads like a comprehensive Nest.js tutorial rather than a focused skill instruction.

1 / 5

Actionability

Contains some executable code patterns (module setup, testing setup, custom decorators) and concrete bash commands for detection. However, much of the content is descriptive lists ('Common issues', 'Root causes', 'Solution priority') rather than executable guidance. The problem-specific approaches give numbered steps but lack complete code solutions for most issues.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

There is a clear validation order (typecheck → unit tests → integration tests → e2e tests) and a detection phase with concrete commands. However, the overall workflow is buried in massive amounts of reference material. The step 0-4 workflow at the top is reasonable but lacks explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery loops for the diagnostic/fix process itself.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Monolithic wall of content with no bundle files to offload detail into. The 17 problem-specific approaches, decision trees, performance optimization sections, code review checklists, and external resources are all inlined into a single massive file. This content desperately needs to be split across multiple files (e.g., PROBLEMS.md, PATTERNS.md, CHECKLISTS.md) with the SKILL.md serving as a concise overview.

1 / 5

Total

8

/

20

Passed

Description

27%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.

This description reads as a persona or role definition ('You are an expert in...') rather than a skill description. It uses first/second person framing, lists abstract knowledge domains instead of concrete actions, and completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause. It would be difficult for Claude to reliably select this skill over other Node.js or backend-related skills.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person with concrete action verbs, e.g., 'Creates and scaffolds Nest.js modules, controllers, services, and providers. Implements guards, interceptors, pipes, and middleware.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about NestJS, Nest.js, @nestjs packages, or building Node.js APIs with decorators and dependency injection.'

Remove the 'You are an expert' persona framing and replace with specific capabilities that distinguish this from general Node.js or backend development skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (Nest.js) and lists architectural concepts (dependency injection, decorators, middleware, guards, etc.), but these are abstract knowledge areas rather than concrete actions the skill performs. No verbs describing what the skill actually does.

2 / 5

Completeness

There is no clear 'what does this do' in terms of concrete actions (only abstract expertise claims), and there is no 'when should Claude use it' clause at all. The description reads as a persona statement rather than a skill description.

1 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'Nest.js', 'dependency injection', 'guards', 'interceptors', 'pipes', and 'authentication' that users might mention. However, it misses natural user phrases like 'NestJS API', 'REST endpoint', 'controller', 'module', or file extensions like '.ts'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Mentioning 'Nest.js' specifically provides some distinctiveness, but broad terms like 'Node.js application architecture', 'database integration', and 'authentication systems' could easily overlap with general Node.js, database, or auth-related skills.

3 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (557 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

9

/

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.