CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

memory-review

Analyze auto-memory for promotion candidates, stale entries, consolidation opportunities, and health metrics. Use when the user runs /si:memory-review or asks what has been learned and what should be promoted or pruned.

66

Quality

83%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 well-structured, self-contained skill body with a clear five-step workflow, concrete analysis criteria, and a fully specified output template. Guidance is highly actionable with only minor heuristic hand-waving around recurrence detection and a slightly padded Tips section.

Suggestions

Trim or merge the Tips section into When-to-Use; lines like "Don't hesitate to delete stale entries — auto-memory will re-learn if needed" are advisory rather than instructional.

Make the recurrence check concrete, e.g., specify how to detect 2+ session appearances (grep for the pattern across MEMORY.md and topic files) instead of "check wording patterns".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence throughout — no space is spent explaining what auto-memory is. Only minor trimming opportunities exist (the "Tips" section is advisory rather than instructive). It is not anchor 5 because the Tips and When-to-Use sections add a small amount of non-essential token spend.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides an executable bash snippet for locating the memory directory, explicit per-entry criteria lists, and a copy-paste-ready report template. Minor gaps remain, e.g., "Appeared in 2+ sessions (check wording patterns)" is a heuristic rather than an executable check, keeping it below the fully-executable anchor 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 5-step workflow with a validation checkpoint for the missing-directory case and a `find`-based staleness verification. The skill is read-only analysis, so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply; it fits anchor 4 (most checkpoints present, minor gaps) rather than anchor 5, which would require explicit error-recovery feedback loops.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single self-contained file with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories) and clean section organization; nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined. This sits above anchor 3's 'could be better organized' but below anchor 5, whose one-level-deep reference structure is not applicable to a self-contained skill of this length.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 strong description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with concrete trigger phrases tied to a specific slash command. Keyword coverage is good but could add a few more natural synonyms.

Suggestions

Vary the verb structure (e.g., "Audit auto-memory, surface promotion candidates, flag stale entries") to strengthen the specificity of the action list.

Add one or two natural trigger variations such as "review memory" or "MEMORY.md is getting crowded" to broaden keyword coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Analyze auto-memory for promotion candidates, stale entries, consolidation opportunities, and health metrics" names the domain and four concrete output categories. It stops short of the anchor-5 pattern of multiple distinct action verbs, but far exceeds the 1-2 actions of anchor 3.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Analyze auto-memory for promotion candidates, stale entries, consolidation opportunities, and health metrics") and when ("Use when the user runs /si:memory-review or asks what has been learned...") with concrete trigger phrases. Not anchor 4, since the 'when' clause is explicit rather than merely present-but-imprecise.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Triggers like "the user runs /si:memory-review", "asks what has been learned", and "what should be promoted or pruned" are natural user phrasings, but common variations such as "review memory" or "MEMORY.md" are absent, matching the anchor-4 'a few natural terms missing' profile.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is distinct, anchored to the specific command "/si:memory-review" and auto-memory auditing. Minor overlap risk remains with generic memory-management or memory-status skills, so it fits anchor 4 rather than the minimal-conflict profile of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

engineering-team/self-improving-agent/skills/memory-review/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.