CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

yes-md

6-layer AI governance: safety gates, evidence-based debugging, anti-slack detection, and machine-enforced hooks. Makes AI safe, thorough, and honest.

55

Quality

62%

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/yes-md/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%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 content is highly actionable with concrete commands, well-sequenced workflows, explicit validation checkpoints, and checklists; its main weakness is repetition of the same shortcut catalog across multiple tables and some motivational padding.

Suggestions

Consolidate the Seven Deadly Shortcuts, Anti-Slack Detection, and Evidence Table into a single canonical table to remove triple repetition of the same behaviors.

Trim the motivational PUA-comparison framing in the intro and Compatibility section to reduce token overhead.

Replace placeholders like {description} in the backup command with a concrete example to make guidance fully copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly tight and actionable rather than explaining basics Claude already knows, but it repeats the same shortcut patterns across three tables (Seven Deadly Shortcuts, Anti-Slack Detection, Evidence Table) and includes motivational PUA-comparison framing that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

It gives concrete commands (curl -v, cp file.yaml file.yaml.bak, lsof, node -v, docker ps), banned-phrase lists, and ✅/❌ before/after examples, with only minor placeholder gaps like {description}.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Debugging Escalation ladder is a clear sequenced process, Safety Gates pair triggers with actions, and Bug Closure Protocol plus Ripple Check provide checklists with explicit verify steps and fix→re-validate feedback loops for destructive operations.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files and the skill is self-contained, which is reasonable for governance guidance; sections are well-organized with clear headers and no nested references, though at ~215 lines it exceeds the simple-skill threshold for a 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

51%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 conveys a clear, specific feature set but is written in branded jargon rather than natural user trigger phrases and omits any 'when to use' guidance, capping its completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause naming natural user situations (e.g. 'Use when the AI guesses without evidence, deflects to the user, or finishes a fix without verifying it').

Replace branded terms ('anti-slack detection', 'machine-enforced hooks') with plain-language keywords users actually say, such as 'stop the AI from guessing' or 'make the AI verify its fixes'.

Drop the over-claim closer 'Makes AI safe, thorough, and honest' in favor of concrete, verifiable capabilities.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several specific mechanisms ('safety gates, evidence-based debugging, anti-slack detection, and machine-enforced hooks'), though they are governance features rather than concrete user-facing actions, and the closing 'Makes AI safe, thorough, and honest' is vague over-claim fluff.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (a 6-layer governance system with named features) but there is no 'Use when…' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Branded jargon like 'AI governance', 'anti-slack detection', and 'machine-enforced hooks' are not phrases a user would naturally say when needing this skill; only 'debugging' is a natural term, and there is no trigger phrase.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'AI governance' is a fairly distinct niche with distinctive mechanism triggers, with only minor overlap risk against persistence or review-focused skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.