CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

skill-writer

Create and improve agent skills following the Agent Skills specification. Use when asked to create, write, or update skills.

56

Quality

65%

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-claude/skills/skill-writer/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 skill body is a well-structured, concise meta-workflow with explicit validation gates and clean progressive disclosure by design. Its main weakness is that nearly all executable detail is offloaded to references/*.md files that are not bundled, so the guidance as shipped is incomplete and the reference navigation is broken.

Suggestions

Bundle the referenced references/*.md files (mode-selection, synthesis-path, authoring-path, etc.) so the dangling paths resolve, or inline the minimum-viable content each step needs to be self-sufficient.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop in Step 7 for the destructive SKILL.md overwrite/update case, e.g. 'If validation fails, fix the artifact and re-run validation before registering'.

Remove the generic "When to Use" boilerplate line; the frontmatter description already carries trigger guidance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and largely assumes Claude's competence (table-driven reference loading, short imperative steps), but the closing boilerplate "Use this skill when tackling tasks related to its primary domain or functionality as described above" is filler that could be trimmed, fitting 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation'.

4 / 5

Actionability

Steps give concrete directions (e.g. "Classify the skill", "Ask one direct question", "Run quick validation with strict depth gates") but the executable detail is delegated to references/*.md files that are absent from the bundle, leaving key details missing and matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–7 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates ("Enforce depth gates before moving to authoring", "Reject shallow outputs that fail depth gates or required artifact checks"), but the validate→fix→retry feedback loop for the destructive SKILL.md overwrite case is only implicit, so it is 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview with a well-signaled reference-loading table and one-level-deep "Read references/..." pointers, which is the right structure, but the referenced files do not exist in the bundle so navigation is broken, fitting 'good structure; references mostly clear; minor organization gaps'.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 cleanly states what the skill does and when to use it with an explicit trigger clause, placing it solidly above average. It loses points mainly on trigger-term breadth and action specificity, which stop short of comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Create and improve agent skills following the Agent Skills specification" names the domain and two concrete actions (create, improve) but offers no further action coverage, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the multi-action level 4/5.

3 / 5

Completeness

It states a clear 'what' (create/improve agent skills per the spec) and an explicit 'when' (Use when asked to create, write, or update skills), but the 'when' could be more concrete with specific trigger phrases, so it sits at the 'both present, when could be more specific' anchor rather than the fully explicit level 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when asked to create, write, or update skills" supplies several relevant trigger phrases but misses common variations or synonyms (e.g. "author", "SKILL.md", "skill spec"), fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Agent skills" is a clear niche with distinct triggers and low conflict risk, though it could lightly overlap with general code-authoring skills, matching 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the minimal-conflict level 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 25 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

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.