Name: ruby-pro
Rating: 48 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

ruby-pro

Write idiomatic Ruby code with metaprogramming, Rails patterns, and performance optimization. Specializes in Ruby on Rails, gem development, and testing frameworks.

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

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/ruby-pro/SKILL.md

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

Quality

Content

36%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 content is compact and sectioned, but it offers mostly generic, non-executable guidance with no code examples and a broken reference to a non-existent playbook. Concrete Ruby/Rails examples and a working reference would substantially improve actionability and navigation.

Suggestions

Add at least one executable Ruby/Rails code example (e.g. an idiomatic ActiveRecord scope or RSpec test) to make the guidance copy-paste ready.

Fix or remove the broken reference: no references/ bundle exists, so 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' should either be created under references/ and linked correctly, or be dropped.

Replace the generic 'Instructions' and 'Use this skill when' boilerplate with Ruby-specific triggers and concrete verification steps (e.g. run RuboCop / RSpec) to add real workflow checkpoints.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short and not verbose, but generic boilerplate ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Working on ruby pro tasks or workflows') adds little that Claude does not already know and could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is high-level and abstract ('Embrace Ruby's expressiveness', 'Use blocks and enumerables effectively') with no executable code, commands, or concrete examples, so the specific steps to execute are missing.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The numbered Approach list is a rough sequence of principles rather than a real workflow, and validation is only the vague 'validate outcomes' with no checkpoints or feedback loops.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers are reasonably well organized, but the lone reference points to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md', a path that does not exist in the bundle (no references/scripts/assets provided), making navigation misleading.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 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 the Ruby/Rails domain and lists several concrete capability areas, but it lacks any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which limits its completeness and distinctiveness. Adding a Use-when clause would lift the two dimensions currently capped or weakened by that omission.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when writing or refactoring Ruby/Rails code, building gems, or writing RSpec/Minitest tests.'

Add concrete natural synonyms users actually say (RSpec, Minitest, Bundler, .rb) to broaden trigger_term_quality.

Sharpen 'Write idiomatic Ruby code' into a more specific action (e.g. 'Writes, refactors, and reviews idiomatic Ruby') to push specificity toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names several concrete capabilities ('metaprogramming, Rails patterns, and performance optimization' plus 'gem development, and testing frameworks'), giving good coverage, but 'Write idiomatic Ruby code' is somewhat generic and the list reads as domains rather than distinct concrete actions.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear and concrete, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say ('Ruby', 'Ruby on Rails', 'gem development', 'testing frameworks') but misses common synonyms and file cues like RSpec, Minitest, Bundler, or .rb.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Ruby/Rails niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, with only minor overlap risk against general web-development or coding skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
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: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/ruby-pro/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.