focused-fix

Deep-dive feature repair — systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies. Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>

Quality

67%

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 ./.gemini/skills/cmd-focused-fix/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

81%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.

The content is a tight, well-structured 5-phase repair protocol with strong sequencing, explicit validation checkpoints, and genuine feedback loops, suffering only from minor redundancy and the absence of concrete diagnostic commands.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and directive — terse bullet lists, manifest/code blocks, and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — with only minor redundancy such as the 'Iron Law' restating the phase ordering.	4 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is concrete and specific for an instruction-only process skill ('Read EVERY file in that folder', 'Search entire codebase for imports from this feature', 'Run ALL related tests'), with only minor gaps such as unspecified commands for the diagnostic checks.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced 5-phase protocol with explicit validation checkpoints ('Confirm root cause with evidence before adding to fix list', 'run related test after each' fix) and feedback loops ('If a fix breaks something else → go back to DIAGNOSE', the 3-Strike Rule), plus a final VERIFY phase running all related tests.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clearly signaled sections (SCOPE/TRACE/DIAGNOSE/FIX/VERIFY) with a 'Related Skills' pointer to a fuller version ('engineering/focused-fix — Full SKILL.md with detailed checklists, output templates, and anti-patterns'), though no bundle files exist to verify one-level-deep references.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description clearly communicates what the skill does and carves out a distinct whole-feature repair niche, but it relies on invocation syntax instead of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and lists only one broad action, leaving completeness and trigger guidance underdeveloped.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to fix or repair a broken feature or module end-to-end, or when a feature has issues across multiple files and dependencies').

List 2-3 concrete specific actions (e.g., map feature scope, trace inbound/outbound dependencies, diagnose and fix issues across all files) to raise specificity beyond a single broad action.

Include common natural synonyms users would say ('broken feature', 'buggy module', 'fix this feature') to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('feature repair') and a concrete action with explicit scope ('systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies'), but lists essentially one action rather than multiple specific concrete actions, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear ('systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies'), but the 'when' is only weakly implied via 'Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>' invocation syntax rather than an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant natural keywords appear ('fix', 'repair', 'feature', 'module') with some synonym coverage, but common variations a user might say ('broken', 'buggy', 'refactor this feature') are missing and the only 'when' signal is invocation syntax rather than trigger phrasing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The whole-feature/whole-module repair niche ('entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies') is mostly distinct from single-bug debugging skills, with only minor overlap risk against closely related skills like systematic-debugging.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Path: .gemini/skills/cmd-focused-fix/SKILL.md
Commit: 19392f7

Reviewed: ~2 hours 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.