CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

humanizer

Tone enforcement patterns for external-facing community responses

51

Quality

57%

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 ./.squad/skills/humanizer/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

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

The body is highly actionable — concrete do/don't pairs and seven ready-to-use templates — and is cleanly organized into sections, but it carries meaningful redundancy across Patterns, Examples, and Anti-Patterns and lacks an explicit drafting→verification workflow. It is a solid, practical skill that would benefit from de-duplication and a short validation step.

Suggestions

De-duplicate across sections: passive voice, profanity, link-dumping, and open-ended info requests each appear in both Patterns and Anti-Patterns — keep each point in one place and cross-reference if needed.

Add an explicit end-of-workflow check, e.g. a short "Before sending" checklist that re-asserts the >80% gold-standard similarity and the profanity/emoji limits, turning Pattern 10 into an actionable verification step.

Consider moving the seven full templates into a referenced examples file to slim the SKILL.md overview, keeping the Patterns and Anti-Patterns as the inline core.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

There is no concept-explanation padding, but the body is notably redundant: the Examples section restates the Patterns and the Anti-Patterns restate Patterns (passive voice, profanity, link-dumping, and open-ended info requests each appear twice), matching the score-2 anchor of mostly efficient but could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Each pattern gives a concrete "do this / not that" pair (e.g. "We're looking into this" not "This is being investigated") and the seven example templates are copy-paste-ready with {placeholders}, matching the score-3 anchor of specific, copy-paste-ready guidance for an instruction skill.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The templates imply a loose opening→body→close structure, but there is no explicit draft→check sequence and the only verification is the soft ">80% similarity" baseline (Pattern 10), so checkpoints are implicit rather than stated, matching the score-2 anchor of sequence present but checkpoints missing.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The file is well-sectioned (Context / Patterns / Examples / Anti-Patterns) with no nested references, but at ~98 lines all 31 concrete items live inline with no overview→detail split, matching the score-2 anchor of some structure but content that could be separated kept inline.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

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 is concise and names a recognizable niche, but it is written in internal/meta jargon rather than natural user trigger terms and lacks any explicit "Use when…" clause, so it answers "what" only weakly and leaves "when" implied. It is clearly above the vague-baseline examples but well below the strong examples that pair concrete actions with explicit triggers.

Suggestions

Lead with concrete verbs, e.g. "Drafts warm, human-sounding replies to community issues and discussions" instead of the abstract "tone enforcement patterns".

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use when PAO drafts external-facing responses for issues or discussions, or when the user asks for community reply wording."

Swap internal jargon ("external-facing", "enforcement patterns") for natural terms users would say ("community replies", "issue responses", "friendly tone").

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Tone enforcement patterns for external-facing community responses" names a clear domain but offers no concrete actions — "enforcement patterns" is an abstract noun phrase rather than verbs like "draft" or "rewrite", matching the score-2 anchor of naming a domain without comprehensive actions.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states what the skill covers but includes no "Use when…" trigger clause, so per the judging guideline completeness is capped at 2; the "when" is only implied by the qualifier "for external-facing community responses".

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "tone enforcement patterns" and "external-facing" are internal jargon a user would not naturally say; only "community responses" approaches natural language, and common variations are missing, so it sits at the score-2 anchor of some relevant keywords but missing common variations.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (tone for external-facing community responses) is fairly specific, but the jargon phrasing and broad tone/communication scope mean it could still overlap with similar writing-style skills, matching the score-2 anchor of somewhat specific but possible overlap.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
bradygaster/squad
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.