review-plugin-submission
Audit a Cursor plugin for marketplace readiness. Use when validating manifests, component metadata, discovery paths, and submission quality before publishing.
73
66%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./create-plugin/skills/review-plugin-submission/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
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.
This is a solid description with a clear niche and explicit trigger guidance via the 'Use when...' clause. Its main weakness is that the specific actions listed (validating manifests, component metadata, discovery paths) are somewhat categorical rather than deeply concrete, and it could benefit from additional natural trigger terms users might use like 'extension' or 'publish'.
Suggestions
Add more natural trigger term variations such as 'Cursor extension', 'publish to marketplace', 'store listing', or 'extension review'.
Make capabilities more concrete by listing specific checks, e.g., 'validates package.json fields, checks icon assets, verifies README completeness, ensures version compliance'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Cursor plugin marketplace readiness) and some actions (validating manifests, component metadata, discovery paths, submission quality), but these are somewhat abstract categories rather than deeply concrete actions like 'check version fields' or 'validate icon dimensions'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (audit a Cursor plugin for marketplace readiness) and 'when' (Use when validating manifests, component metadata, discovery paths, and submission quality before publishing), with an explicit 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'Cursor plugin', 'marketplace', 'manifests', 'publishing', and 'submission quality', but misses common user variations like 'extension', 'Cursor extension', 'publish to marketplace', 'store listing', or 'package.json validation'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very specific niche — Cursor plugin marketplace auditing is unlikely to conflict with other skills. The combination of 'Cursor plugin', 'marketplace readiness', and 'manifests' creates a distinct trigger profile. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a well-structured audit checklist for Cursor plugin submissions with clear sections and specific file paths to verify. Its main weaknesses are the lack of executable validation commands/code and the absence of explicit error recovery steps, which are important for a validation workflow. The checklist section also partially duplicates the workflow, slightly reducing token efficiency.
Suggestions
Add concrete executable examples for key validation steps, such as a JSON parsing command to validate `plugin.json` or a regex pattern for kebab-case validation.
Add explicit feedback loops: what to do when validation fails at each step (e.g., 'If frontmatter is missing, add required fields and re-run check'), especially since this is a validation workflow.
Consolidate the Checklist section with the Workflow to eliminate redundancy—either make the checklist a summary with cross-references or merge the details into the workflow steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient and doesn't over-explain concepts Claude already knows, but some sections could be tightened. For example, the checklist partially repeats information already covered in the workflow steps. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured checklists and specific file paths/patterns to check (e.g., `.cursor-plugin/plugin.json`, `skills/*/SKILL.md`), which is helpful. However, it lacks concrete executable commands or code snippets for validation—there are no examples of how to parse JSON, validate kebab-case, or check frontmatter programmatically. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly listed and sequenced, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops (e.g., what to do when a step fails, how to re-validate after fixes). For an audit/validation workflow, missing error recovery guidance caps this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size and scope (under 50 lines, single-purpose audit task), the content is well-organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Checklist, Output) without needing external references. The structure is easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- cursor/plugins
- Commit
7dd9fea
- 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.