cpp-coding-standards
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
85
79%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
97%
1.11xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/cpp-coding-standards/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description that clearly communicates its purpose and when to use it. Its main strength is the explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms. Its weakness is the lack of specific concrete actions—it could benefit from listing particular standards or practices it enforces (e.g., RAII, smart pointers, type safety) to improve specificity and distinctiveness.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Enforces RAII patterns, smart pointer usage, const-correctness, and naming conventions based on the C++ Core Guidelines.'
Improve distinctiveness by clarifying what differentiates this from a general C++ coding skill, e.g., mentioning specific guideline categories like memory safety, resource management, or concurrency rules.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (C++ coding standards) and references the C++ Core Guidelines, but doesn't list specific concrete actions beyond 'writing, reviewing, or refactoring.' It lacks detail on what specific standards or checks are enforced (e.g., memory safety rules, naming conventions, RAII patterns). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (C++ coding standards based on C++ Core Guidelines) and 'when' (Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code). The explicit 'Use when...' clause with specific trigger scenarios is present. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'C++', 'coding standards', 'C++ Core Guidelines', 'writing', 'reviewing', 'refactoring', 'modern', 'safe', 'idiomatic'. These are terms users would naturally use when seeking help with C++ best practices. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it specifies C++ and references the Core Guidelines specifically, it could overlap with a general C++ coding skill or a code review skill. The mention of 'isocpp.github.io' and 'C++ Core Guidelines' adds some distinctiveness, but 'writing C++ code' is broad enough to potentially conflict with other C++ skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a thorough, highly actionable C++ coding standards reference with excellent executable examples and a useful final checklist. Its main weakness is length — at 500+ lines in a single file with no progressive disclosure to supporting documents, it consumes significant context window. Some rule summary tables restate what Claude already knows about C++ Core Guidelines without adding unique project-specific value.
Suggestions
Split detailed code examples (RAII pattern, Rule of Five, concurrency) into separate reference files (e.g., RAII_EXAMPLES.md, CONCURRENCY.md) and link from the main SKILL.md to reduce token footprint.
Remove or condense the rule summary tables — Claude already knows the C++ Core Guidelines; focus on the project-specific interpretations, preferences, and the checklist rather than restating guideline titles.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive and well-organized, but at ~500+ lines it includes substantial content that Claude already knows (e.g., basic C++ concepts, standard library usage patterns). Many rule tables simply restate guideline titles without adding novel insight. However, the code examples are tight and the structure avoids truly wasteful prose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Every section provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready C++ code examples with clear DO/DON'T patterns. The code is complete (not pseudocode), includes proper includes, and demonstrates both correct and incorrect usage. The final checklist is directly actionable for code review. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is primarily a coding standards/style guide rather than a multi-step workflow, so the single-task exemption applies. The content is clearly sequenced with a 'When to Use' section, cross-cutting principles, per-topic guidance, and a final checklist that serves as a validation checkpoint before marking work complete. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic document with no references to supporting files despite being very long. Sections like the full RAII pattern, Rule of Five implementation, and concurrency examples could be split into separate reference files. The document is well-organized with clear headers, but everything is inline in a single large file. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (724 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- affaan-m/everything-claude-code
- Commit
841beea
- 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.