professional

Polished, business-ready design with modern typography, structured layouts, and a trustworthy visual identity.

Quality

61%

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 ./skills/professional/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-organized, concise design-system guideline-authoring skill with concrete tokens and a clear workflow. Its main weaknesses are the lack of a worked example and missing validation checkpoints in the workflow. Adding a short example guideline and explicit validate/proceed steps would raise actionability and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Include one short, fully-worked example guideline (e.g., a button component rule with states, tokens, and a do/don't pair) so the output structure is concrete and copy-paste ready.

Add explicit validation checkpoints to the authoring workflow, e.g. a 'verify each rule is anchored to a token or threshold before proceeding' step and a final QA checklist gate.

Tighten the slight redundancy between 'Rules: Do/Don't', 'Expected Behavior', and 'Quality Gates' to recover a few tokens without losing clarity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and dense with bullets, tokens, and lists, and it never explains concepts Claude already knows (no definition of design systems or basic programming). Nearly every section earns its place; it is tight rather than verbose, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor 3.	3 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete specifics (hex color tokens, font weights, spacing scale, an explicit required-states list, and a required output structure), but it is meta-level authoring guidance with no executable code, commands, or a fully worked example guideline to copy. It is more actionable than abstract anchor 1 but not copy-paste ready like anchor 3.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 'Guideline Authoring Workflow' gives a clear numbered 6-step sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops (no 'validate then proceed'). The sequence is present but checkpoints are implicit, matching anchor 2 rather than the validated anchor 3.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is a single self-contained file with no bundle files and is organized into clearly labeled sections (Mission, Style Foundations, Rules, Workflow, Output Structure, QA). There are no nested or multi-level references, so organization alone is sufficient for the top anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 reads as a polished marketing tagline rather than a trigger-oriented capability statement. It conveys a design aesthetic but omits concrete actions and any 'use when' trigger guidance. Adding a concrete verb and an explicit trigger clause would move it from adequate to strong.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete action verb and name the artifact produced, e.g. 'Generates a polished, business-ready design system with modern typography...' rather than describing attributes.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause naming natural user phrases like 'design system', 'brand guidelines', 'business-ready UI', or 'visual identity'.

Replace marketing adjectives ('trustworthy visual identity') with concrete, triggerable nouns that users would actually say when they need this skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the design domain and qualities ('modern typography', 'structured layouts', 'trustworthy visual identity') but uses no concrete action verbs, so it describes attributes rather than what the skill does. It is more substantive than the vague anchor 1 but lacks the multiple concrete actions that anchor 3 requires.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill produces (a polished business-ready design) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so the 'when to use it' half is missing. Per the judging guidelines, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'design', 'typography', and 'layouts' are somewhat natural, but 'polished', 'business-ready', and 'trustworthy visual identity' read as marketing adjectives rather than keywords a user would say. There is partial keyword coverage but it misses common variations a user would actually utter.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Polished, business-ready design' is fairly generic and could overlap with other design or brand skills, though the typography/layout qualifiers give it some niche identity. It is somewhat specific but could still conflict with similar skills.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: bergside/awesome-design-skills
Path: skills/professional/SKILL.md
Commit: f631a09

Reviewed: 1 day 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.