consistency-violation-capture

Capture codebase inconsistencies discovered during exploration OR implementation. TRIGGER when you find conflicting patterns while looking for code to follow (e.g., "some UseCases extend AbstractMemberUseCase, others don't") or different approaches to the same concern across modules (naming, error handling, validation placement). Log silently to .claude/consistency-violations.yaml so teams can standardize later.

Quality

73%

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 ./.claude/skills/consistency-violation-capture/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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 content is highly actionable with concrete, copy-paste-ready YAML guidance and a clear workflow, but it is markedly verbose with heavy repetition across sections and inlines material that would benefit from reference files. Tightening the redundant trigger restatements and extracting the example/schema bulk would materially raise conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated trigger lists (TRIGGER CHECKLIST, Failure Examples, Purpose, When to Use, Important Guidelines) into a single canonical section to remove the duplicated restatements.

Move the six full YAML example scenarios and the YAML schema into a references/ file (e.g. examples.md), keeping only one compact example inline in SKILL.md.

Drop or compress the 'Benefits' and 'Future Use' sections, which restate motivations already covered in 'Purpose' without adding actionable guidance.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~500-line body restates the same triggers across 'TRIGGER CHECKLIST', 'Failure Examples', 'Purpose', 'When to Use', and 'Important Guidelines', and includes six full YAML examples plus a duplicated schema — noticeably verbose with several padded/repetitive sections rather than merely 'some' unnecessary explanation.	2 / 5
Actionability	Provides a complete, copy-paste-ready YAML entry schema with the exact file path (.claude/consistency-violations.yaml) and six fully worked examples covering common cases, matching the anchor 5 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' criterion.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence (Discover → Silent Logging → File Management → User Review) with a 'When NOT to Use' gate is present; logging to a YAML file is not a destructive/batch operation requiring a validation cap, but there is no explicit validation of the written YAML, leaving minor checkpoint gaps at anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and all content — including six full examples and a duplicated YAML schema that could live in a reference file — is inlined in one ~500-line document; section headers give structure, but content that should be split is inline, fitting anchor 3 rather than 2 (it is not a monolithic wall) or 4 (no references are signaled).	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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 strong: it states a clear purpose, gives a concrete file target, and provides an explicit TRIGGER clause with realistic examples. It is specific, complete, and largely distinct, with only minor synonym/overlap gaps.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and concrete actions — 'Capture codebase inconsistencies' and 'Log silently to .claude/consistency-violations.yaml' — with concrete examples, landing at 'lists several specific actions with minor gaps' rather than the fully comprehensive anchor 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what (capture and log inconsistencies) and when ('TRIGGER when you find conflicting patterns while looking for code to follow') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor 5 example.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrases a user might say — 'conflicting patterns', 'different approaches to the same concern across modules', 'naming, error handling, validation placement' — with good but not exhaustive synonym coverage, so anchor 4 over anchor 3 or 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (silent logging of cross-module consistency violations) with distinct triggers; minor overlap risk with sibling skills (signal-capture, implicit-decision-capture) referenced in the body keeps it at 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (506 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: cteyton/packmind
Path: .claude/skills/consistency-violation-capture/SKILL.md
Commit: e198635

Reviewed: 5 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.