CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

accounting-audit-system-builder

Routes an accounting or audit request to the right module skill, from software selection through monthly closing, asking only what is missing. Use for books of accounts or audit files.

Quality

74%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/antigravity-accounting-audit-system-builder/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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, genuinely actionable router skill: the phrase-to-module mapping, intake question, tier sets, handoff contract, and worked examples give Claude exactly what to do at each step, and the one reference file is real and one level deep. The main cost is redundancy — the cycle is stated twice, key traps appear in multiple sections, and self-referential commentary about the pack's size adds tokens without adding instruction.

Suggestions

State the accounting cycle once: keep the ASCII stage diagram and fold the 15-step 'accounting flow this pack encodes' section into it or move it to references/catalog.md.

Deduplicate domain traps: the receipt-is-not-income rule appears in both 'Rules the modules hold to' and 'Common Pitfalls'; keep it in one place and cross-reference from the other.

Trim meta-commentary ('A business does not need 100 databases', 'A list of 100 is not a recommendation', '100 near-identical skills is a lot of catalog surface') and replace the saved tokens with the missing fallback: what to do when a user-picked module fails the pre-handoff verification.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The routing tables, intake lists, and examples are dense and useful, but the accounting cycle is stated twice (ASCII diagram and the 15-step flow), the receipt-versus-income trap is repeated in both 'Rules the modules hold to' and 'Common Pitfalls', and meta-commentary like 'A business does not need 100 databases' and '100 near-identical skills is a lot of catalog surface' pads without instructing. It is mostly efficient but could be tightened by roughly a third.

3 / 5

Actionability

The body gives concrete, executable routing guidance: an explicit phrase-to-module mapping ('"which software", "new system", "migrate" -> Software Selection'), the exact intake question ('Where in the accounting cycle is the business right now?'), tier definitions, a concrete handoff path pattern ('../<slug>/SKILL.md'), a defined output format, and three worked examples with expected outputs. Minor gaps remain, e.g., no fallback when a picked module fails the 'verify the selected installed module' check.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit checkpoints: stop conditions ('stop as soon as the remaining answers would not change the output'), unknown-answer handling ('record it as unknown and carry on'), pre-handoff verification ('verify the selected installed module before handoff'), and 'Never label a failed check Done'. A 5 would specify error-recovery loops (what to do when the installed-module verification fails or the user picks nothing).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single bundle reference 'references/catalog.md' exists, is clearly signaled ('Full index: references/catalog.md'), and is one level deep; routing logic is appropriately inline while the bulk module catalog is external. The body runs ~280 lines and sections like 'The accounting flow this pack encodes' and the examples could arguably live in references, keeping it below a 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 concise, third-person description that answers both what (routes accounting/audit requests to the right module skill) and when (books of accounts or audit files) with genuinely natural trigger phrases. It is held below the top band by limited action coverage — routing and asking are the only concrete behaviors named — and by a trigger list that omits common synonyms like bookkeeping, month-end close, and reconciliation.

Suggestions

Name one or two more concrete behaviors to lift specificity, e.g. 'recommends 2-3 modules with one-line reasons and waits for the user to pick'.

Broaden trigger coverage with the synonyms users naturally say: bookkeeping, month-end close, reconciliation, audit preparation.

Optionally signal the boundary so it does not fire for single-artifact requests, e.g. 'Use for books of accounts or audit files; skip when the user has already named one specific book or report.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the domain ('accounting or audit request') and one to two concrete actions ('Routes ... to the right module skill', 'asking only what is missing'), with 'from software selection through monthly closing' as scope rather than an action. This matches the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; a 4 would require several distinct specific actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: what it does ('Routes an accounting or audit request to the right module skill ... asking only what is missing') and when ('Use for books of accounts or audit files'). The 'when' clause is present but brief — a single trigger pair rather than the concrete multi-phrase trigger coverage of a 5, and clearly stronger than the implied-only 3.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases are present: 'accounting', 'audit', 'books of accounts', 'audit files', 'software selection', 'monthly closing'. Coverage is good but misses common synonyms users would say, such as 'bookkeeping', 'month-end close', 'reconciliation', or 'payroll/TDS', which keeps it below the comprehensive 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche — a router across an accounting/audit module pack — with trigger terms ('books of accounts', 'audit files') that are unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. There is minor overlap risk with the individual module skills it routes to and adjacent finance/bookkeeping skills, so it fits 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the minimal-conflict 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

boisenoise/skills-collections

Path

skills/antigravity-accounting-audit-system-builder/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.