coding-standards

TypeScript、JavaScript、React、Node.js開発のための汎用コーディング標準、ベストプラクティス、パターン。

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./docs/ja-JP/skills/coding-standards/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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, packed with concrete PASS/FAIL code examples across TypeScript, React, API design, and testing. Its weaknesses are verbosity from restating well-known principles and a monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure via separate reference files.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the KISS/DRY/YAGNI principle explanations that Claude already knows, keeping only project-specific conventions.

Split large sections (e.g. React best practices, API design, testing standards) into separate reference files linked from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Resolve `// Implementation` placeholders in examples so guidance is fully copy-paste executable.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly concrete PASS/FAIL code with little concept padding, but it is very long and re-explains KISS/DRY/YAGNI principles Claude already knows, so it could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Abundant concrete, mostly copy-paste-ready TypeScript/React examples cover common cases, with only minor gaps such as `// Implementation` placeholders keeping it below a 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	This is a standards reference organized clearly by topic rather than a sequenced workflow, so steps/checkpoints are not really applicable; it is well-structured but has no validation feedback loops.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers give reasonable structure, but the ~520-line body is a monolithic single file with no bundle references, and content that could be split (React, API, testing standards) is all inline.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

45%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 the technology stack clearly but relies on generic abstract nouns instead of concrete actions and omits any 'Use when' trigger guidance. It is moderately specific but lacks the trigger phrases and completeness needed for strong discoverability.

Suggestions

Replace abstract nouns with concrete actions, e.g. 'Enforces naming, immutability, error-handling, and type-safety conventions for TypeScript/React/Node.js code.'

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when writing or reviewing TypeScript, JavaScript, React, or Node.js code.'

Include natural trigger synonyms users actually say (e.g. 'code review', 'linting rules', 'refactor', 'best practices') to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) but the actions 'コーディング標準、ベストプラクティス、パターン' are generic abstract nouns with no concrete capabilities, matching the 'names domain but actions minimal/generic' anchor.	2 / 5
Completeness	A 'what' is present (coding standards/best practices for the listed stack) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Technology names (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) are natural terms users say, but there are no action-oriented trigger phrases or synonyms, leaving common variations missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Naming specific technologies narrows the niche, but 'coding standards' is broad and would overlap with many general coding-related skills, fitting the 'somewhat specific but could overlap' anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (528 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/ECC
Path: docs/ja-JP/skills/coding-standards/SKILL.md
Commit: e04ea0b

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.