CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

web-design-guidelines

Review files for compliance with Web Interface Guidelines.

38

Quality

36%

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 ./skills/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

36%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 essentially a thin wrapper that tells Claude to fetch an external URL and apply whatever rules it finds there. It provides almost no actionable content of its own—no examples of rules, no output format specification, no error handling, and redundant sections that repeat the same vague 4-step process. The skill's value is entirely dependent on the external URL being accessible and containing well-structured instructions.

Suggestions

Add at least one concrete example showing input code, a rule violation, and the expected output format (e.g., `file:line` format with a sample finding) so Claude knows what to produce even before fetching.

Remove the redundant 'Usage' section or merge it with 'How It Works'—they describe the same steps. Also remove the vacuous 'When to Use' section.

Add error handling guidance: what to do if the URL fetch fails (e.g., retry, use cached version, inform user), and how to validate that the fetched content is actually the expected guidelines.

Include a brief summary of the key rule categories from the guidelines so the skill has some standalone value even if the fetch fails.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is relatively short but has some redundancy—the 'How It Works' and 'Usage' sections largely repeat the same 4-step process. The 'When to Use' section is a vacuous tautology that adds no value. Could be tightened significantly.

3 / 5

Actionability

The skill delegates all actual rule content and output format to an external URL, providing no concrete examples of what rules look like, what output format to use, or how to invoke WebFetch. There's no executable code or specific commands—just vague instructions to 'fetch' and 'apply all rules.'

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The steps are listed but poorly defined—there's no guidance on what to do if the fetch fails, no validation of the fetched content, and no concrete example of the output format. The workflow is essentially 'fetch URL, read files, check rules, output findings' with no checkpoints or error handling.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is short enough that it doesn't need external files, and it references an external URL for the actual guidelines content. However, there are no bundle files to support it, and the reference to the external URL is clear but the skill provides zero fallback or summary of what the guidelines contain, making it entirely dependent on a single external fetch.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

36%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 is too terse and vague to effectively guide skill selection. It identifies a domain (Web Interface Guidelines compliance) but lacks specific actions, trigger terms, and any 'when to use' guidance. Without more detail on what aspects of compliance are checked and when this skill should be selected, it would be difficult for Claude to reliably choose this skill over other review or compliance-related skills.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'UI compliance', 'web standards review', 'interface guidelines check', 'frontend review'.

List specific actions performed, such as 'checks accessibility compliance, validates responsive design patterns, reviews semantic HTML usage, verifies WCAG conformance'.

Specify which 'Web Interface Guidelines' are being referenced (e.g., a specific standard or internal document) to improve distinctiveness and reduce conflict risk with other review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Web Interface Guidelines' compliance) and one action ('Review files'), but the action is generic and no specific sub-actions are listed (e.g., checking accessibility, validating HTML structure, checking responsive design).

2 / 5

Completeness

Has a vague 'what' (review files for compliance) but no 'when' clause at all. There is no 'Use when...' guidance, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 3, and the weak 'what' brings it below that threshold.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes 'Web Interface Guidelines' and 'compliance' and 'review files' which are somewhat relevant, but misses natural user phrases like 'UI review', 'web standards', 'accessibility check', 'frontend audit', or specific guideline names.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Web Interface Guidelines' is somewhat specific, but 'review files for compliance' is broad enough to overlap with other code review, linting, or standards-checking skills. The specific guideline set is not named precisely enough to be fully distinct.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

10

/

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.