CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

java-coding-standards

Spring Bootサービス向けのJavaコーディング標準:命名、不変性、Optional使用、ストリーム、例外、ジェネリクス、プロジェクトレイアウト。

61

Quality

71%

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 ./docs/ja-JP/skills/java-coding-standards/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 tight, example-driven coding-standards document that assumes Claude's competence and spends nearly every token on project-specific rules, with concrete PASS/FAIL code throughout. Its only soft spots are a few bullet-only sections lacking examples and the absence of any application/verification guidance for applying the standards to existing code.

Suggestions

Add short FAIL examples or a one-line demonstration to the bullet-only sections (format/style, testing expectations, exception wrapping) so every rule is concretely illustrated.

Include a brief note on how to apply the standards to existing code (e.g., which rules take precedence, or a quick checklist when reviewing a PR) to sharpen workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean throughout: every section is a short bullet list or a minimal code snippet with PASS/FAIL labels ('// PASS: recordとfinalフィールドを優先', '// FAIL: 複雑なネストされたストリームを避ける'), with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Most guidance is concrete and imitable — real Java snippets for records, Optional chaining ('.map(MarketResponse::from).orElseThrow(...)'), bounded generics, and a project layout tree — but a few sections (フォーマットとスタイル, テストの期待) are bullet-only without a code example, and the exception-wrapping rule is stated without a demonstration, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

As a standards reference rather than a multi-step process, the sections are clearly sequenced by concern with unambiguous PASS/FAIL examples and a summarizing takeaway ('覚えておく'), but there is no guidance on how to apply the standards to existing code or check compliance, so it sits just below fully explicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single file is well-organized into clearly headed sections with no nested or buried references (there are no bundle files at all), which is good structure; however, at roughly 130 lines it exceeds the under-50-line case where well-organized sections alone warrant a 5, and no example-heavy detail is split out to reference files.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 clear, appropriately concise description that names a distinct niche and lists its topic coverage, but it is a topic inventory rather than an action statement and contains no 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness. Adding an explicit trigger phrase and reframing topics as actions would lift it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when writing or reviewing Java code for Spring Boot services, or when the user mentions naming, exceptions, or project layout.'

Reframe the topic list as concrete actions (e.g. 'Enforce naming conventions, immutability, Optional/stream usage...') so it reads as capabilities rather than a table of contents.

Include natural trigger variations such as 'conventions', 'style guide', 'code review', and 'Java 17' to broaden how users can naturally invoke the skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain clearly ('Spring Bootサービス向けのJavaコーディング標準') and enumerates seven topic areas ('命名、不変性、Optional使用、ストリーム、例外、ジェネリクス、プロジェクトレイアウト'), but these are topic labels rather than concrete actions, matching the 'names domain and concrete items but not comprehensive actions' level rather than the action-listing anchors above.

3 / 5

Completeness

It has a clear 'what' (Java coding standards covering named topic areas) but no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage — 'Spring Boot', 'Java', '命名', '不変性', 'Optional', 'ストリーム', '例外', 'ジェネリクス' are all terms a user would naturally mention — but common variations such as 'conventions' ('規約'/'コンベンション'), 'style guide', or 'code review' are missing, so it falls just short of comprehensive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is specific — Java coding standards specifically for Spring Boot services — and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, though it could overlap with a general Java or code-review skill since no 'when' phrasing narrows the trigger context.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
affaan-m/ECC
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.