CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cs-feat-impl

Deprecated 兼容入口:旧 cs-feat-impl 调用用;转交 cs-feat --stage impl。新请求不要主动选择。

54

Quality

60%

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 ./plugins/codestable/skills/cs-feat-impl/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is a concise, well-organized delegation protocol with a clear step sequence and an explicit halt-on-failure checkpoint. Its only weakness is actionability: the steps direct what to do but leave the concrete mechanism for loading cs-feat unspecified.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and well under 50 lines, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line states a directive or a maintenance constraint, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor.

3 / 3

Actionability

The four numbered steps give concrete directional guidance (load cs-feat, carry the stage intent, do not re-prompt the user, halt on load failure), but the actual loading mechanism is left abstract with no tool, command, or example, leaving a key detail unspecified.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The execution rules are a clearly sequenced 1–4 list with an explicit failure checkpoint in step 4 ('停止并报告兼容入口不可继续'), which for a simple delegation skill satisfies the top anchor's sequence-plus-checkpoint requirement.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is short and single-purpose with no need for bundle files (none present), and content is organized into clearly labeled '执行规则' and '维护规则' sections, which meets the under-50-lines well-organized anchor.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

35%

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 clearly signals deprecation and the forwarding target, but it is written as internal routing jargon rather than user-facing trigger language, so it lacks natural trigger terms and a positive 'Use when...' clause. It is distinct as a legacy shim yet overlaps with the main cs-feat skill it delegates to.

Suggestions

Add a positive 'Use when...' trigger clause in user-facing terms (e.g., 'Use when honoring an existing cs-feat-impl invocation or legacy prompt that expects the implementation stage') so the when-guidance is not only anti-guidance.

Replace internal-only jargon with keywords a user would actually say, so the description surfaces naturally when the legacy entry is needed.

State the concrete capability plainly in one user-readable phrase (e.g., 'Routes legacy cs-feat-impl calls to the current cs-feat implementation stage') alongside the deprecation notice.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The phrase '转交 cs-feat --stage impl' names one concrete action (forwarding to a named skill/stage), but it is a single routing action rather than the multiple specific capabilities the top anchor calls for.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states what the skill does (forwards to cs-feat --stage impl) and a when of sorts ('旧 cs-feat-impl 调用用'), but the 'when' is legacy routing/anti-guidance ('新请求不要主动选择') rather than a positive 'Use when...' user trigger, so it caps at 2 per the guideline.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The text is built from internal routing jargon and a skill name ('兼容入口', 'cs-feat-impl 调用', 'cs-feat --stage impl'); a user would never naturally say these words when they need this skill, matching the 'no natural keywords' anchor.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It is clearly scoped to a specific legacy entry ('cs-feat-impl'), but since its entire purpose is to delegate to 'cs-feat', it inherently overlaps with that sibling skill rather than occupying a fully distinct niche.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
codestable/CodeStable
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.