CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

web-design-guidelines

Review files for compliance with Web Interface Guidelines.

49

Quality

54%

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/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 compact, well-structured overview that correctly delegates the heavy rule content to a fetched external document rather than inlining it. Its main weaknesses are redundant step lists and a vacuous "When to Use" section, plus actionability that depends almost entirely on the fetched content.

Suggestions

Merge the near-duplicate "How It Works" and "Usage" step lists into a single sequenced workflow to remove redundancy.

Replace the filler "When to Use" line with concrete trigger conditions (e.g. "Use when the user asks to audit or review web/UI files for guideline compliance").

Add a brief inline example of the expected `file:line` output and one or two representative rules, so the skill is actionable even before the fetch succeeds.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient, but the "How It Works" and "Usage" sections duplicate the same fetch-read-check-output sequence, and the "When to Use" line ("applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview") is vacuous filler that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

It gives a concrete source URL, names WebFetch as the tool, and specifies the `file:line` output format, but all substantive rules are outsourced to the fetched document, so the skill itself provides incomplete concrete guidance (anchor 3).

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The fetch-read-check-output sequence is clearly numbered with a fallback ("If no files specified, ask the user"), and as a read-only review there is no destructive/batch validation cap; it falls just short of anchor 5 due to lacking explicit validation/checklist steps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, well-sectioned, and delegates the bulk rule content to a clearly signaled one-level-deep external reference (the fetched guidelines URL); minor redundancy between sections keeps it just below a 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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 identifies a specific niche and a clear purpose but is thin on concrete actions and entirely lacks a "Use when" trigger clause. It is readable and distinct but not comprehensive enough to score above mid-range.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause naming natural triggers, e.g. "Use when reviewing UI/web files for compliance with web interface guidelines, or when the user asks for a web UX/accessibility audit."

Expand the action list beyond the single generic verb "Review" to concrete actions like "audit HTML/CSS/JS against the guidelines and report findings in file:line format."

Include natural synonyms and file types users would mention (e.g. "web UI", "frontend", "accessibility", ".html/.css") to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ("Web Interface Guidelines") but the only action, "Review files for compliance", is minimal and generic, matching the anchor 2 example "Processes PDF files" rather than the multi-action anchor 3.

2 / 5

Completeness

It states a clear "what" (review files for compliance with the guidelines) but provides no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It contains some relevant keywords ("web interface", "guidelines", "compliance", "review") but lacks common natural variations or synonyms a user would actually say, fitting anchor 3's "some relevant keywords but missing common variations".

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "Web Interface Guidelines" niche is fairly specific and mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against general code-review skills, matching anchor 4; it is more distinct than the broad anchor 3.

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.