CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

vr-ar

VR/AR development principles. Comfort, interaction, performance requirements.

43

Quality

44%

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/game-development/vr-ar/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

40%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 a well-organized but largely descriptive reference of VR/AR principles, strong on structure but weak on executable guidance and workflow sequencing. It reads as general domain knowledge rather than skill-specific, actionable instruction.

Suggestions

Add concrete, actionable steps or code for the key directives — e.g., a frame-budget snippet, a locomotion/teleport implementation pattern, or a Unity/Unreal checklist command — so the guidance is executable rather than descriptive.

Replace the generic 'When to Use' boilerplate with explicit, specific triggers and a short workflow for the most common task (e.g., a comfort/performance review sequence with a validation checkpoint).

Trim or move widely-known reference material (depth cues, motion-sickness causes) to keep only what is non-obvious or skill-specific, and consider splitting the detailed platform/performance tables into a references file for cleaner progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body uses lean tables and bullets with no padded prose, but much of the substance (depth cues, motion-sickness causes, snap turning) is general VR knowledge Claude already has, fitting 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened'; it is above 2 because the format is genuinely compact, and below 4 because several sections restate known concepts rather than earning every token.

3 / 5

Actionability

The content states high-level directives ('Maintain 90 FPS', 'Avoid camera shake', 'Large, readable text') and useful numeric specs but provides no commands, code, or concrete implementation steps, matching 'Minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute'; it is not a 3 because it describes targets rather than giving actionable how-to guidance.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The body is organized into topical sections (1-6) but presents no sequenced process or workflow, and the 'When to Use' section is generic boilerplate ('applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview'), fitting 'Rough sequence present but many gaps; steps poorly defined'; it is above 1 because the sections are coherently organized, and below 3 because there is no actual workflow to follow.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single self-contained file with no bundle files present, organized into six clearly headed numbered sections with tables and no nested references, matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; references mostly clear'; it is not a 5 because at ~120 lines some detailed platform/performance tables could be split into reference files, and not a 3 because the organization is clean and navigable.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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 identifies a distinct VR/AR niche but is held back by the absence of any 'when to use' trigger guidance and by listing topic areas rather than concrete actions. Adding an explicit trigger clause and natural synonyms would meaningfully raise its score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete user triggers (e.g., 'Use when building VR/AR or XR experiences, or when the user mentions virtual reality, augmented reality, Quest, or immersive apps').

Replace the topic-area list ('Comfort, interaction, performance requirements') with concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Reviews VR/AR experiences for comfort, performance, and interaction design').

Include natural synonyms such as 'virtual reality', 'augmented reality', 'XR', and 'mixed reality' so the description matches how users actually phrase the request.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The phrase 'VR/AR development principles' names the domain and lists topic areas ('Comfort, interaction, performance requirements') but contains no concrete actions or verbs, matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'; it is not a 1 because the domain and sub-areas are specific, and not a 3 because no concrete capabilities are stated.

2 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear-ish 'what' (VR/AR development principles) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline; it is not a 4 because the 'when' is entirely absent rather than merely weak.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'VR/AR' is a natural term users would say, but coverage is thin with no common synonyms such as 'virtual reality', 'augmented reality', 'XR', 'mixed reality', or 'immersive', fitting 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'; it is above 2 due to the natural 'VR/AR' trigger but below 4 for the missing synonyms.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

VR/AR is a distinct niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills, with only minor overlap risk against closely related game-development or 3D-graphics skills, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'; it is not a 5 because the description lacks explicit distinct trigger phrases.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

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.