golang-patterns

Idiomatic Go patterns, best practices, and conventions for building robust, efficient, and maintainable Go applications. Use when writing or reviewing Go code and idiomatic structure or conventions are in question.

Quality

65%

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 ./skills/golang-patterns/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.

A thorough, well-structured catalog of idiomatic Go patterns with strong concrete code examples. Its main weaknesses are verbosity from restating well-known concepts, a monolithic single-file layout with no progressive disclosure, and the absence of any sequenced workflow.

Suggestions

Trim or remove prose that restates basic Go idioms Claude already knows (e.g. the one-line principle intros), letting the Good/Bad code pairs speak for themselves to improve conciseness.

Move the full .golangci.yml configuration and the standard project layout into separate reference files (e.g. references/linter-config.md, references/project-layout.md) and link to them from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Add a brief sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints for the most common task (e.g. write -> gofmt/vet -> go test -race -> golangci-lint run) so workflow clarity is explicit rather than implied by scattered tooling commands.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly compact code examples, but several prose lines restate basic Go idioms Claude already knows ('Go favors simplicity over cleverness', 'Make the Zero Value Useful', 'Accept Interfaces, Return Structs'), so it could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, copy-paste-ready Go code appears throughout with clear Good/Bad contrasts, but some examples rely on illustrative helper functions (process, fetch, doSomething) and `// ...` placeholders that keep it just short of fully executable.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Content is well-organized by topic with a 'When to Activate' list, but this is a reference catalog rather than a sequenced multi-step workflow, so there are no explicit checkpoints or feedback loops to reward a higher score.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers provide clear in-file structure, but the ~670-line body is monolithic: the full linter config, project layout, and extensive code examples are all inlined with no references to deeper files, and no bundle files exist.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

73%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.

A solid, well-scoped description that clearly states both what the skill covers and when to use it with an explicit 'Use when' trigger. It is held back from the top band by somewhat generic, adjective-heavy phrasing in the 'what' portion.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the Go domain and concrete actions ('writing or reviewing Go code', 'building robust, efficient, and maintainable Go applications'), but the actions are fairly generic and 'patterns, best practices, and conventions' leans on abstract phrasing rather than a comprehensive list of specific actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (idiomatic Go patterns, best practices, conventions) and 'when' ('Use when writing or reviewing Go code and idiomatic structure or conventions are in question'), but the 'what' is more abstract than the anchor-5 example, so it sits just below 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrases users would say ('writing or reviewing Go code', 'idiomatic structure', 'conventions'), giving good keyword coverage, though a few natural synonyms are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clearly scoped to idiomatic Go with distinct triggers ('Go code', 'idiomatic structure or conventions'), giving it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (677 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/ECC
Path: skills/golang-patterns/SKILL.md
Commit: d8409a4

Reviewed: 1 day 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.