endaoment
Donate to 501(c)(3) charities onchain via Endaoment - tax-deductible crypto donations
70
63%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./src/skills/bundled/endaoment/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
54%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 identifies a clear and distinctive niche—crypto donations to 501(c)(3) charities via Endaoment—with good natural trigger terms. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and could list more specific actions (e.g., browse charities, track donation receipts) to improve completeness and specificity.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to donate cryptocurrency to a charity, make a tax-deductible onchain gift, or mentions Endaoment.'
List more specific actions beyond 'donate', such as 'search for eligible 501(c)(3) organizations, initiate onchain donations, generate tax-deductible receipts.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (onchain charitable donations) and the platform (Endaoment), and mentions a key feature (tax-deductible crypto donations), but doesn't list multiple concrete actions beyond 'donate'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (donate to charities onchain via Endaoment) but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also fairly thin, placing this at 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'donate', 'charities', '501(c)(3)', 'onchain', 'Endaoment', 'tax-deductible', 'crypto donations'. Good coverage of terms a user seeking charitable crypto giving would use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very clear niche: onchain charitable donations via a specific platform (Endaoment) to 501(c)(3) organizations. Highly unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a concise, well-organized skill that clearly communicates the Endaoment donation interface. Its main weaknesses are the lack of explicit workflow sequencing with validation steps (important for financial transactions) and the ambiguity around whether the slash commands are pre-built tools or need implementation. The command reference format is clean but would benefit from a clear step-by-step donation flow with confirmation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Add an explicit numbered workflow: 1) Search/verify charity → 2) Check USDC balance → 3) Approve USDC if needed → 4) Execute donation → 5) Verify transaction success
Clarify whether the /donate commands are pre-existing tool integrations or need to be implemented, and if the latter, provide the actual contract ABI calls or SDK code
Add validation checkpoints for the financial operations, such as confirming the org fund exists on-chain before donating and verifying transaction receipts after submission
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and well-structured. Every section serves a purpose—contract addresses, commands, examples, fees—with no unnecessary explanation of what USDC, Base, or 501(c)(3) charities are. Every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides clear command syntax and examples, but lacks executable code showing how the smart contract interactions actually work (e.g., ABI calls, approval transactions, how the registry lookup is performed). The slash commands suggest a pre-built tool interface but there's no indication of the underlying implementation or how Claude should execute these. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The implicit workflow (search → info → approve → donate) is discernible from the commands but never explicitly sequenced. There are no validation checkpoints—e.g., checking approval status before donating, verifying the EIN resolves to a valid org fund, or confirming transaction success. For financial/destructive operations, this lack of explicit validation caps the score. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size (~50 lines), the content is well-organized into logical sections (contracts, commands, examples, fees, setup) with clear headers. No external references are needed and the structure supports easy scanning. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- alsk1992/CloddsBot
- Commit
e71a5f6
- 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.