CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

writing-skills

Use when creating, updating, or improving agent skills.

58

Quality

68%

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/writing-skills/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 an efficient, well-organized dispatcher that routes to a real one-level-deep reference bundle with concrete thresholds and executable examples. Its main weaknesses are minor redundancy between sections, validation only at the end of the workflow, and one broken reference (gotchas.md).

Suggestions

Remove the broken 'See [gotchas.md](gotchas.md)' link or add the file, so every cross-reference resolves to a real bundle file.

Deduplicate the component listings: the Quick Decision Tree and the Component Index table repeat CSO/Standards/Anti-Rationalization/Testing — fold one into the other or cross-link instead of restating.

Add an explicit validation/feedback checkpoint inside the 'How It Works' sequence (e.g., after applying CSO and anti-rationalization, verify the description triggers and rules resist rationalization before deploying) rather than relying solely on the final pre-deploy checklist.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it uses decision trees, tables, and brief lists without explaining concepts Claude already knows; not a 5 because the decision tree and component index table restate the same components (CSO, Standards, Anti-Rationalization, Testing) and the 'Common Mistakes' table overlaps the 'Pre-Deploy Checklist', minor redundancy that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance — specific line thresholds ('<'200 lines', '200-1000 lines', '10+ products'), a copy-paste YAML template, and runnable bash (mkdir/touch) — with only minor gaps; not a 5 because the core skill-writing instruction is deferred to references and the body itself is mostly routing rather than fully copy-paste-ready guidance for the common cases.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'How It Works' section gives a clear 5-step sequence (Identify goal -> Select template -> Apply CSO -> Add anti-rationalization -> Test) and the 'Pre-Deploy Checklist' acts as a validation gate; not a 5 because validation is only at the end (a deploy gate) rather than explicit checkpoints or feedback loops between intermediate steps, and the testing step merely names 'RED-GREEN-REFACTOR' without an inline loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-structured dispatcher with clearly signaled one-level-deep references into references/*, and almost all linked files (tier-1/2/3 READMEs, templates, cso, standards, testing, anti-rationalization) actually exist; not a 5 because 'See [gotchas.md](gotchas.md)' is a broken reference — gotchas.md does not exist in the bundle — which is a real navigation defect the rubric says to score against actual bundle structure.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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 is a concise, explicit 'Use when...' trigger that names a distinct niche (agent skill authoring), but it merges what and when into a single generic-verb phrase and lacks keyword synonyms or file-extension-style triggers. It is solid but could be richer and more specific.

Suggestions

Separate the 'what' from the 'when': state concrete capabilities first (e.g., 'Draft, structure, and validate SKILL.md files and reference bundles'), then add the 'Use when...' trigger clause.

Broaden trigger-term coverage with natural synonyms users actually say, such as 'SKILL.md', 'skill authoring', 'skill template', and 'reference bundle'.

Replace generic verbs ('creating, updating, improving') with more concrete operations like 'scaffold a new skill', 'split a long SKILL.md into references', and 'optimize a description for discovery'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('agent skills') and three actions ('creating, updating, or improving'), but the verbs are generic and abstract rather than concrete operations, matching the anchor that lists 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage; not a 4 because it lacks the specific, granular actions seen in the 'Extracts text, fills forms, converts pages' example.

3 / 5

Completeness

The explicit 'Use when...' clause provides trigger guidance (so it is not capped at 3), and the phrase conveys both what (create/update/improve skills) and when; not a 5 because what and when are merged into a single clause rather than separately articulated with multiple concrete trigger phrases as in the anchor-5 example.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'agent skills' is a relevant natural keyword and the verbs are reasonable, but common variations and synonyms a user might say ('authoring', 'building', 'SKILL.md', 'skill template') are missing, fitting the anchor for some relevant keywords with missing synonyms; not a 4 because coverage is thin rather than 'good with a few missing'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'agent skills' / skill authoring is a clear meta-niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'; not a 5 because it could still overlap with adjacent meta-authoring or tooling skills, and the trigger set is narrow.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing, 16 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 16 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

Total

13

/

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.