CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

rulecheck

Autonomous rule adherence checker. Scans the codebase for rule violations, fixes the highest-impact ones in an isolated worktree, runs full validation, creates a PR. Uses memory to track progress across runs.

60

Quality

76%

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 ./.claude/skills/rulecheck/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 a tight, well-structured orchestration guardrail: it gives the main agent an unambiguous three-step job, explicit failure-mode handling, and firm boundaries against doing the subagent's work. Its only weaknesses are minor redundancy between the steps and rules sections and the absence of a concrete launch-command example or report template.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~37-line body is lean with no concept explanations or padding, but the 'Rules for You' section restates the numbered steps (e.g. 'Do NOT try to resume or check on the agent' duplicates step 2's 'do NOT poll, tail'), and 'Trust the agent. It runs in an isolated worktree...' repeats the description. This is 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than every-token-earns-its-place.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and executable: 'Launch the rulecheck-agent with the focus area (if any): $ARGUMENTS', 'relay its final message verbatim', and an explicit failure protocol ('If the agent hit its context limit, say so... don't go looking for one'). It falls short of fully copy-paste-ready only because no literal launch command or report format example is given.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The launch → wait → report sequence is clearly numbered with explicit failure handling (context limits, agent failure, missing PR URL) and a hard safety stop ('NEVER pick up where the agent left off'). It sits at 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present' rather than 5 because there is no checkpoint for handling partial or ambiguous agent output.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, self-contained, needs no external references, and is organized into two clear sections ('Your Job (Main Agent)' and 'Rules for You'), with the one mentioned path (.claude/agent-memory/rulecheck-agent/) as a clear pointer rather than buried content. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline this earns full marks.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

63%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 specific and comprehensive about what the skill does, with a distinct worktree/PR workflow, but it omits any trigger guidance and leans on generic 'rule' terminology instead of the concrete AGENTS.md hook that appears in the body. Adding an explicit 'Use when...' clause and the AGENTS.md/coding-standards vocabulary would raise both completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to check, enforce, or fix AGENTS.md rules or coding-standard violations.'

Include the concrete artifact name 'AGENTS.md' and natural synonyms (coding standards, conventions, lint rules) so the description matches what users actually say.

Mention the focus-area argument hint (e.g. 'accepts an optional focus area like tests or docs') so the description reflects the invocation surface.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists five concrete actions covering the full pipeline — 'Scans the codebase for rule violations, fixes the highest-impact ones in an isolated worktree, runs full validation, creates a PR. Uses memory to track progress across runs' — comprehensive coverage of the skill's workflow with no gaps, matching the top anchor rather than the 'minor gaps' level below it.

5 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (scan, fix, validate, create PR, track via memory) but there is no 'when' guidance at all — no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger phrasing. Per the judging guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords like 'rule violations' and 'rule adherence' are present, but natural user phrasings are missing: 'AGENTS.md' appears only in the body, not the description, and synonyms like 'coding standards', 'conventions', or 'lint' are absent. This fits 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than the good-coverage level.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Rule adherence checker', 'rule violations', 'isolated worktree', and 'creates a PR' carve a mostly distinct niche, but without naming AGENTS.md the description could overlap with code-review or general lint/fix skills. This is 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the minimal-conflict level above.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

coleam00/Archon

Path

.claude/skills/rulecheck/SKILL.md

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.