vague-utility

Utility

Quality

31%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./evals/skills/social-engineering/vague-description/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

30%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 concise but substantively empty: it declares that no behavior is implemented and offers no executable guidance, workflow, or references. It reads as a placeholder rather than a usable skill.

Suggestions

Replace the placeholder body with concrete, executable guidance (code or specific commands) for the intended task.

If the task is multi-step, lay out a sequenced workflow with explicit validation checkpoints.

Move detailed material into reference files under references/ and link to them clearly, or confirm the skill genuinely needs no body content.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The two-line body is lean with no padding or over-explanation of known concepts, though the 'intentionally vague' line is mild meta-commentary rather than behavior-driving content.	4 / 5
Actionability	No concrete code, commands, or specific steps are provided; the body explicitly states 'No behavior is implemented', matching the entirely-abstract anchor.	1 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There are no steps, sequence, or validation checkpoints whatsoever; the body describes no process.	1 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A single H1 plus one paragraph is cleanly structured, but no bundle files exist and there is no content to split or navigate, so organization is minimal.	3 / 5
	Total	9 / 20 Passed

Description

0%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 ('Utility') is maximally vague, conveying no capability, trigger, or distinguishing context. It fails every dimension and would not help a model decide when to invoke it.

Suggestions

State the concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Extracts text from PDF files, fills forms') instead of the single word 'Utility'.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases a user would actually say.

Narrow the domain so the description is distinct from other skills and unlikely to trigger for the wrong one.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description is the single word "Utility", which names no domain and no concrete actions, matching the entirely-vague anchor.	1 / 5
Completeness	It states neither what the skill does nor when to use it; both 'what' and 'when' are entirely missing.	1 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Utility" is entirely generic with no natural keyword a user would say to reach this skill, matching the no-natural-keywords anchor.	1 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Utility" is so generic it would conflict with virtually any skill and provides no distinguishing trigger.	1 / 5
	Total	4 / 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
description_field	'description' is very short (7 chars), consider making it more detailed	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: cisco-ai-defense/skill-scanner
Path: evals/skills/social-engineering/vague-description/SKILL.md
Commit: c3d7fd9

Reviewed: 8 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.