coding-standards

Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development.

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

50%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is highly actionable with concrete PASS/FAIL code examples, but it spends most of its tokens re-explaining basic programming concepts Claude already knows, and it is a monolithic file with no progressive disclosure. It functions as a usable reference but is far from token-efficient.

Suggestions

Cut explanations of basic concepts (KISS/DRY/YAGNI definitions, 'use descriptive names', 'avoid any', magic numbers, deep nesting) and keep only the project-specific PASS/FAIL conventions Claude would not infer.

Split the document into one-level-deep reference files (e.g. REACT.md, API.md, TESTING.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with signaled links.

Add a brief 'when to apply these standards' workflow note so the reference has an explicit usage context.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a long wall of text that re-teaches basic programming concepts Claude already knows (KISS, DRY, YAGNI definitions, descriptive naming, 'don't use any', memoization, lazy loading, magic numbers, deep nesting), which the rubric explicitly penalizes as padded unnecessary context.	1 / 3
Actionability	Numerous concrete, executable PASS/FAIL TypeScript/React snippets (interfaces, async functions, custom hooks, zod validation, NextResponse usage) are specific and copy-paste ready.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	This is a reference/standards document rather than a multi-step workflow, so there is no sequenced process; sections are well organized but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops to score higher.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The entire content is a single monolithic SKILL.md (~250 lines) with no bundle files and no external references; it has clear header structure, but content that should be split (API design, React, testing) is all inline.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 clearly scopes the technology domain but offers only abstract capability nouns and no explicit usage triggers, leaving 'when to use this skill' unanswered. It is distinguishable but generic enough to risk overlap with other coding skills.

Suggestions

Replace abstract nouns ('standards, best practices, and patterns') with concrete actions, e.g. 'Enforce naming conventions, error-handling patterns, immutability, and component structure'.

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when writing or reviewing TypeScript, JavaScript, React, or Node.js code, or when the user asks for coding standards or best practices.'

Add common trigger variations like 'code review', 'refactoring', or 'linting rules' to improve discoverability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a concrete domain ('TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js') but the 'actions' are abstract nouns — 'Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns' — rather than concrete verbs, so it is not a comprehensive list of specific actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	Answers 'what' (standards/best practices/patterns for a named stack) but provides no 'when' guidance — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger, which caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say ('TypeScript', 'React', 'Node.js', 'coding standards', 'best practices') but misses common trigger variations like 'code review', 'refactoring', 'linting', or 'writing code', and lacks any explicit trigger phrasing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The named tech stack narrows it, but 'Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns' is broad and would overlap with many code-related skills, and there are no distinct triggers to disambiguate.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 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 (521 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/everything-claude-code
Commit: 4130457

Reviewed: 4 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.