Name: content-review
Rating: 71.93 (1 reviews)
Author: circleci

content-review

Review CircleCI documentation pages for quality, clarity, and adherence to style guidelines. Use this skill whenever the user asks to review, audit, or assess documentation content, check for style compliance, evaluate page quality, or wants feedback on docs pages. Also trigger when the user mentions content quality, readability issues, or asks "how does this page look" or "is this page good." Even if they just reference a docs file path and ask for a review or feedback, use this skill.

0.93x

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

78%

0.93x

Average score across 1 eval scenario

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/content-review/SKILL.md

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 thorough, well-structured instruction-only review skill with actionable guidance, a concrete report template, and a clear multi-step workflow. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (a redundant Example Usage section) and hardcoded user-specific filesystem paths that limit portability.

Suggestions

Remove or compress the 'Example Usage' section, which restates the Step 1-5 process already detailed above it, to recover token budget.

Replace hardcoded paths like '/Users/rosieyohannan/github/circleci-docs/AGENTS.md' and the save location with repo-relative equivalents (e.g. '<repo-root>/AGENTS.md') so the skill is executable in any checkout.

Consider extracting the full report markdown template into a references/ file (e.g. REPORT_TEMPLATE.md) and signaling it from the body, reducing inline length while keeping the 11-dimension rubric in place.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient — the 11 dimensions and report template are core value — but the 'Example Usage' section redundantly restates the already-detailed Step 1-5 process, and the report template with nested placeholders plus repeated tone/priority/specificity guidance could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides a copy-paste-ready report template, a concrete file-naming convention with a worked example, and 11 well-defined review dimensions; the hardcoded machine-specific paths ('/Users/rosieyohannan/github/circleci-docs/...') are a minor executability gap outside that environment.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear five-step sequence (read context, find related pages, review, generate, save) with the 11 dimensions acting as a checklist and an explicit fallback ('If you can't find related pages, note that... but still complete the other 10 categories'); lacks an explicit post-save verification checkpoint.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clear sections (Input, Process, Example Usage, Important Notes, What This Skill Is NOT) with no bundle files present; the inline 11-dimension rubric and template are legitimately the skill's core, though the ~233-line body could optionally split the report template into a reference.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

91%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 strong, well-structured description that clearly states capabilities and provides rich, natural trigger phrasing including colloquial variants. It is highly complete and distinctive, with only minor synonym-repetition in listed actions and slight overlap risk with adjacent review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('CircleCI documentation pages') and several concrete review actions ('review, audit, or assess', 'check for style compliance', 'evaluate page quality'), but the actions are near-synonyms rather than distinct technical operations, leaving minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Review CircleCI documentation pages for quality, clarity, and adherence to style guidelines') and when ('Use this skill whenever the user asks to review... Even if they just reference a docs file path and ask for a review or feedback').	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive natural-language triggers including synonyms ('review, audit, assess') and colloquial phrasings users actually say ('how does this page look', 'is this page good'), plus 'content quality' and 'readability issues'.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (CircleCI documentation content review) with distinct triggers, but the broad 'reference a docs file path and ask for a review' phrasing creates minor overlap risk with general review or partials skills.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: circleci/circleci-docs
Path: skills/content-review/SKILL.md
Commit: 415b15a

Reviewed: 3 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.