perf-theory-tester

Use when running controlled perf experiments to validate hypotheses.

Quality

70%

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 ./perf/skills/theory-tester/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%

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

The skill is concise and cleanly sectioned with a clear procedure and output schema, but it leans on placeholders instead of executable commands and points to a missing reference file. Adding concrete benchmark commands, a failure-recovery loop, and the referenced docs file would address the lowest dimensions.

Suggestions

Add a concrete, runnable benchmark command (or a worked example) instead of the '<benchmark command>' placeholder to lift actionability.

Add a failure feedback loop, e.g. 'If a validation pass diverges from baseline, revert and re-check the change before retrying,' to satisfy workflow clarity for destructive change contexts.

Create the referenced docs/perf-requirements.md (or remove the dangling reference) so the canonical-contract pointer resolves.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and well-sectioned with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' anchor.	3 / 3
Actionability	It gives a numbered procedure and a concrete output template, but the benchmark command is a placeholder ('<benchmark command>') and steps like 'Confirm baseline is clean' lack executable specifics, fitting the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The four-step sequence includes validation passes and a revert checkpoint, but there is no failure feedback loop (validate -> fix -> retry); per the scoring notes, missing feedback loops in destructive/batch change contexts caps this at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well organized for a short skill, but 'Follow docs/perf-requirements.md as the canonical contract' references a file that does not exist in the bundle, so navigation is broken rather than cleanly one-level-deep.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

75%

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 concise and supplies an explicit trigger plus a distinct niche, but it stays abstract rather than listing concrete capabilities. Stronger trigger-term coverage and a few named actions would lift the weaker dimensions.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the perf-experimentation domain and a composite action ('running controlled perf experiments to validate hypotheses') but does not enumerate multiple distinct concrete actions, matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	The 'Use when running controlled perf experiments to validate hypotheses' clause supplies an explicit trigger (when) and states the skill's purpose (what), satisfying the both-what-and-when anchor; it is not capped at 2 because an explicit 'Use when...' trigger is present.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'perf experiments' and 'validate hypotheses' are reasonably natural, but common variations a user might say ('performance', 'benchmark', 'benchmarking') are missing, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Controlled perf experiments to validate hypotheses' carves a clear niche that is unlikely to collide with general-purpose skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: composio-community/awesome-claude-plugins
Path: perf/skills/theory-tester/SKILL.md
Commit: e521f7a

Reviewed: about 12 hours 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.