tech-debt

Scan, prioritize, and report technical debt. Usage: /tech-debt <scan|prioritize|report> [options]

Quality

71%

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/tech-debt/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

76%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 body is an admirably lean overview with concrete invocations and well-signaled script references, but it stops short of a full workflow: the scan→prioritize→report pipeline is only implied and lacks validation checkpoints for the batch operations. Referenced scripts also do not resolve within the local bundle.

Suggestions

Add an explicit sequenced workflow, e.g. 'scan produces inventory.json → prioritize consumes it → report renders trends', with a validation step between scan and prioritize.

Include a validation/verification checkpoint (e.g. confirm inventory.json is non-empty and well-formed before prioritizing) for the batch scan and report operations.

Resolve or clarify the script references so the listed scripts exist in the local bundle, or note that they live at the repo path explicitly.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and under 50 lines with no concept explanations or padding — usage lines, examples, and script signatures each earn their place; matches the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Concrete copy-paste invocations in Examples and full CLI signatures for each script give mostly executable guidance; not a 5 because the referenced scripts are not present in the local bundle and no example output is shown.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Three sub-commands are listed with signatures and the scan→inventory→prioritize→report pipeline is only weakly implied, but there are no explicit validation/verification checkpoints for the batch scan/report operations, capping the score at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized sections (Usage, Examples, Scripts, Skill Reference) with clearly signaled one-level-deep references; not a 5 because the referenced scripts are absent from the local bundle and the 'Skill Reference → SKILL.md' cross-reference is an unusual navigation pattern.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 names a clear domain and three concrete actions with mostly natural trigger terms, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, relying on a usage/invocation line instead of trigger guidance. It is distinct but has minor overlap risk with adjacent code-review skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions technical debt, code debt, or asks to audit/remediate a codebase for debt.'

Broaden trigger terms with synonyms like 'code debt', 'remediation backlog', or 'debt inventory' to improve natural-term coverage.

Tighten distinctiveness by contrasting with generic linting/review, e.g. '...not general code review or linting.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (technical debt) and three concrete actions — 'Scan, prioritize, and report' — matching the 'lists several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not a 5 because the verbs are generic and coverage is not comprehensive.	4 / 5
Completeness	Clear 'what' ('Scan, prioritize, and report technical debt') but the only 'when' is the invocation 'Usage: /tech-debt ...' with no explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'technical debt' plus 'scan/prioritize/report' are natural user terms with good coverage; not a 5 because synonyms and variations are absent, though the domain has no file extensions to cover.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'technical debt' is a clear niche with distinct triggers; not a 5 because of minor overlap risk with general code-review or linting skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Path: .gemini/skills/tech-debt/SKILL.md
Commit: 19392f7

Reviewed: ~17 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.