team-frontend-debug
Frontend debugging team using Chrome DevTools MCP. Dual-mode — feature-list testing or bug-report debugging. Triggers on "team-frontend-debug", "frontend debug".
76
71%
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 ./.codex/skills/team-frontend-debug/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 (frontend debugging via Chrome DevTools MCP) and mentions two operational modes, which helps with distinctiveness. However, it lacks specific concrete actions, natural user-facing trigger terms beyond command-like keywords, and an explicit 'Use when...' clause that would help Claude know when to select this skill in broader contexts.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'Inspects DOM elements, analyzes network requests, checks console errors, evaluates CSS styles, and monitors JavaScript execution'.
Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user reports a frontend bug, asks to debug a web page, mentions CSS/JS issues, or needs to test UI features in a browser'.
Include more natural user keywords like 'browser issue', 'CSS problem', 'JavaScript error', 'page layout', 'console log', 'network request' to improve trigger term coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (frontend debugging) and mentions two modes (feature-list testing, bug-report debugging), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like inspecting DOM elements, analyzing network requests, checking console errors, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is partially addressed (dual-mode frontend debugging with Chrome DevTools MCP), and trigger terms are listed but there's no explicit 'Use when...' clause explaining when Claude should select this skill beyond the trigger keywords. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms like 'frontend debug', 'Chrome DevTools', 'bug-report', and 'feature-list testing', but misses natural user phrases like 'CSS issue', 'JavaScript error', 'page not loading', 'console errors', 'browser debugging', or 'inspect element'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'Chrome DevTools MCP', 'dual-mode', and specific trigger terms like 'team-frontend-debug' creates a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%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 orchestration skill with excellent workflow clarity, strong actionability through concrete templates and tool specifications, and good progressive disclosure via role file references. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity—some tables and sections (Chrome DevTools tool listing, delegation lock) could be more compact without losing clarity. Overall it's a high-quality skill for a complex multi-agent debugging workflow.
Suggestions
Condense the Chrome DevTools MCP tools table—consider grouping by category (navigation, inspection, interaction) with brief one-word purposes, or move the full table to specs/debug-tools.md since it's already referenced there.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly long and includes some information that could be more compact (e.g., the full Chrome DevTools tool table lists 16 tools with obvious purposes, the delegation lock table is verbose). However, most content is reference material that workers/coordinator need, so it's not egregiously padded—just could be tightened in places. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides concrete spawn templates with exact parameter structures, specific tool names with MCP prefixes, explicit delegation lock rules with allowed/blocked verdicts, exact file paths, and copy-paste ready code blocks for agent coordination patterns. The guidance is highly specific and executable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The dual-pipeline flows are clearly sequenced (TEST→ANALYZE→FIX→VERIFY and REPRODUCE→ANALYZE→FIX→VERIFY), with explicit validation checkpoints (verifier role), iterative debug loops (FIX→VERIFY→re-FIX with max 3 rounds), error handling table covering edge cases, and agent health check reconciliation steps. The delegation lock acts as a validation gate for the coordinator. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md serves as a clear router/overview, with well-signaled one-level-deep references to role files (roles/coordinator/role.md, roles/tester/role.md, etc.) and spec files (specs/pipelines.md, specs/debug-tools.md). Content is appropriately split between the overview and referenced files. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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 |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow
- Commit
0f8e801
- 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.