squad-conventions

Core conventions and patterns used in the Squad codebase

1.27x

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

93%

1.27x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.squad-templates/skills/squad-conventions/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is squad-conventions in FritzAndFriends/BlazorWebFormsComponents

Quality

Content

93%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.

The body is an exemplary conventions skill: lean, entirely composed of non-obvious project facts, with concrete names, code, and explicit anti-patterns that give unambiguous guidance. The only soft spot is the absence of an explicit verification step connecting the patterns to a change workflow.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Every section carries project-specific facts Claude cannot know otherwise (the fatal() pattern, color constants, .squad/ ownership rules, skip-if-exists behavior) with zero padding or explanation of known concepts. This matches anchor 5 ('lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place').	5 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is fully concrete: named functions and constants (fatal(), copyRecursive(), GREEN/RED/DIM/BOLD/RESET), the exact test command ('node --test test/'), a precise file-structure map, and copy-paste-ready code snippets covering the common cases. This matches anchor 5; the small illustrative snippets are complete and executable.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	This is a conventions reference rather than a multi-step workflow, so most of the value is in clear do/don't patterns with safety guards (skip-if-exists, 'never overwrite user state', 'all tests must pass on all platforms'). It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because there is no explicit change-then-verify sequence (e.g., 'run npm test after modifications') tying the patterns into a checkpointed workflow.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill has no bundle files and none are needed — the ~60-line body is cleanly sectioned (Context, Patterns, Examples, Anti-Patterns) with nothing that clearly belongs in a separate file. Per the rubric's simple-skill guidance, well-organized sections with no need for external references score 5.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

41%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.

The description is short and unambiguous about its subject, but it is a topic label rather than a capability statement: no concrete actions, no natural trigger terms, and no guidance on when to use the skill. It would rarely be selected by matching a user's request.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when modifying Squad source code, adding features to create-squad, or when the user mentions Squad conventions or the Squad CLI.'

List the concrete coverage so the 'what' names actions: error handling via fatal(), zero-dependency rule, file layout, Windows-safe paths, and testing conventions.

Include natural trigger terms users would say — 'Squad', 'create-squad', 'squad conventions', 'squad source code' — to improve matching and distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description "Core conventions and patterns used in the Squad codebase" names its domain but lists no concrete actions or capabilities — it says what the file contains, not what can be done with it. It fits anchor 2 ('names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'), not anchor 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions, and not anchor 1 because the domain is named specifically rather than being pure abstraction.	2 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is fairly clear (a reference of core conventions and patterns for the Squad codebase) but the 'when' is completely absent — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the guidelines. It is above anchor 2 because the 'what' is not vague, and below anchor 4 because no 'when' guidance exists at all.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The only candidate keywords are 'conventions', 'patterns', and 'Squad' — generic terms with no natural invocation phrases or file/tool names beyond 'Squad'. This matches anchor 2 ('one or two generic keywords; missing the natural phrases users say'); anchor 3 would require relevant keywords that users actually say when they need this skill.	2 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Tying the description to the specific 'Squad codebase' gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict against generic skills. It falls short of anchor 5 because there are no distinct trigger phrases, leaving minor overlap risk with other codebase-conventions or style-guide skills (anchor 4).	4 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: bradygaster/squad
Path: .squad-templates/skills/squad-conventions/SKILL.md
Commit: 29e69f5

Reviewed: 5 days 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.