Automate Amplitude tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): events, user activity, cohorts, user identification. Always search tools first for current schemas.
67
60%
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 ./skills/antigravity-amplitude-automation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
57%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 niche (Amplitude automation via Composio/Rube MCP) which makes it distinctive, but it lacks specificity in the actions it performs and omits an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The listed capabilities read more like category headers than concrete actions, and the trigger terms could better cover natural user language around analytics and tracking.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Amplitude analytics, tracking events, querying user behavior, or managing cohorts.'
Make actions more concrete by specifying verbs, e.g., 'Query event data, look up user activity, create and manage cohorts, identify users' instead of just listing nouns.
Include natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'analytics', 'tracking', 'product analytics', 'funnel', or 'retention'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Amplitude via Rube MCP/Composio) and lists some actions (events, user activity, cohorts, user identification), but these are more like category labels than concrete actions. It doesn't specify what it does with these (e.g., 'create events', 'query user activity', 'build cohorts'). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is partially addressed (automate Amplitude tasks), and there's a procedural instruction ('Always search tools first'), but there is no explicit 'Use when...' clause telling Claude when to select this skill. The 'when' is only implied by the domain mention. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'Amplitude', 'events', 'user activity', 'cohorts', and 'Composio/Rube MCP', but misses common user phrasings like 'analytics', 'tracking', 'funnel', 'retention', or 'product analytics'. The terms are somewhat technical and may not match how users naturally phrase requests. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is quite specific to Amplitude via Rube MCP (Composio), which is a narrow enough niche that it's unlikely to conflict with other skills. The combination of the specific platform and tooling makes it clearly distinguishable. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill with clear workflow sequencing and good coverage of Amplitude operations via Rube MCP. Its main weaknesses are moderate redundancy (pitfalls repeated in multiple places), lack of executable tool invocation examples, and a monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting detailed content into referenced files. The async operation pattern and ID resolution workflows are well-documented with appropriate validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Consolidate pitfalls into a single section rather than repeating them in each workflow AND in the Known Pitfalls section—this would significantly reduce token count.
Add at least one fully executable MCP tool call example showing the actual invocation syntax (not just pseudocode steps) to improve actionability.
Remove the generic 'When to Use' and 'Limitations' boilerplate sections at the end, which add no skill-specific value.
Consider splitting detailed workflow descriptions into a separate reference file and keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with the quick reference table and setup instructions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably structured but includes some redundancy—pitfalls are repeated across individual workflows and then again in the 'Known Pitfalls' section (e.g., user ID resolution, timestamps). The 'Common Patterns' section partially duplicates workflow steps. The boilerplate 'When to Use' and 'Limitations' sections at the end add little value. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Tool names and parameter lists are concrete and specific, but there are no executable code examples—only pseudocode-style numbered steps and one JSON snippet for user properties. The actual MCP tool invocations are never shown with real call syntax, making it less than copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step workflows are clearly sequenced with explicit prerequisite steps (e.g., FIND_USER before GET_USER_ACTIVITY), and the async cohort pattern includes a proper feedback loop (call, check status, repeat until complete/error). The setup section has a clear verification sequence before proceeding. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's a long monolithic document (~180 lines of substantive content) with no references to external files. The repeated pitfalls and common patterns could be split out, and the document would benefit from a concise overview pointing to detailed sub-documents. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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 | |
431bfad
Table of Contents
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.