CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

browserstack

Run tests on BrowserStack. Use when user mentions "browserstack", "cross-browser", "cloud testing", "browser matrix", "test on safari", "test on firefox", or "browser compatibility".

60

Quality

76%

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 ./.gemini/skills/browserstack/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is browserstack in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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 highly actionable, well-sectioned integration guide with real commands and code. Its weaknesses are token efficiency — heavy repetition in the config examples and time-sensitive version pins — and the absence of any progressive disclosure: a large config template is inlined rather than split into a reference file.

Suggestions

Replace the three near-identical project blocks with a single loop over a browser-spec array (e.g., [{browser: 'chrome', os: 'Windows', os_version: '11'}, ...]) to cut ~40 lines, and drop the redundant BROWSERSTACK_USERNAME=$BROWSERSTACK_USERNAME prefixing from the run command.

Move the full playwright.config.ts template into a references/ file (e.g., references/config-template.md) and keep only a short snippet plus a pointer in SKILL.md, enabling progressive disclosure.

Fix the project-name mismatch: align the --project selectors (chrome@*) with the actual project names in the config (chromelatestwindows-11), or rename the projects to match the selectors, and add a brief note on handling failed sessions (where to find video/logs via the MCP tools).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The three TypeScript project blocks are near-identical 19-line repeats (~40 avoidable lines that a single loop over browser specs would replace), the run command redundantly re-exports env vars already in the environment, and version pins like "Ventura" and "os_version: '11'" are time-sensitive without a deprecated-section framing. Mostly efficient but clearly could be tightened beyond anchor 4's "minor instances".

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete slash commands, a full copy-paste TypeScript config, npm scripts, and an MCP tool table make the guidance mostly executable. Not anchor 5 because the run commands use --project='chrome@*' while the shown config defines projects named "chromelatestwindows-11" — the headline command fails as written — and placeholders like "// ... existing config" leave gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each of the five capabilities has a numbered, sequenced workflow, with an explicit credential checkpoint ("Verify credentials are set" and the prerequisites "stop" if unset) and per-browser result reporting. Not anchor 5 because "Monitor execution" is vague, there is no failure-recovery loop, and the local-testing section is three thin steps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized, but at ~170 lines with no reference files at all, the 58-line config template is inline content that clearly belongs in a separate references/ file. The under-50-line simple-skill exception does not apply, and anchor 3 ("content that should be separate is inline") fits better than anchor 4.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 concise, well-structured description with an explicit and richly triggered 'when' clause. The 'what' is clear but minimal, listing only one action, and a few natural trigger variants (chrome, edge, mobile testing) are missing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Run tests on BrowserStack" names the domain and one concrete action, but is not comprehensive — capabilities covered in the body (get build results, list browsers, local tunneling) are absent from the description. It exceeds anchor 2 because "run tests" is a concrete action, not a generic verb like "Processes PDF files".

3 / 5

Completeness

"Run tests on BrowserStack" explicitly answers what the skill does, and "Use when user mentions ... browserstack, cross-browser, ... or browser compatibility" explicitly answers when with concrete trigger phrases. Anchor 4 ("'when' could be more explicit or specific") does not fit — the when clause is maximally explicit.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Seven natural trigger phrases ("browserstack", "cross-browser", "cloud testing", "browser matrix", "test on safari", "test on firefox", "browser compatibility") are phrases users would actually say. Not anchor 5 because common variants are missing: "test on chrome", "edge", and "mobile/cross-device testing".

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"browserstack" is a distinct product-name trigger creating a clear niche, but generic terms like "cross-browser", "browser compatibility", and "test on firefox" would also naturally fire for local cross-browser testing skills — minor overlap risk with closely related skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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

alirezarezvani/claude-skills

Path

.gemini/skills/browserstack/SKILL.md

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.