CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

run-smoke-tests

Run Playwright smoke tests, debug failures, and verify fixes

64

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 ./cursor-team-kit/skills/run-smoke-tests/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

93%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.

A lean, well-structured skill body with fully executable commands and a clear feedback-loop workflow; the only gap is the absence of an explicit verification checkpoint (e.g. how to inspect a Playwright trace, or re-run a fixed test to confirm stability) in the workflow itself.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body (~40 lines) teaches nothing Claude already knows; sections (Trigger, Workflow, Example Commands, Guardrails, Output) each add non-obvious project-specific value (e.g. "npm run smoketest-no-compile", "Quarantine tests only when explicitly requested"). Lean and efficient with every token earning its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

The Example Commands section provides copy-paste-ready commands covering the common cases: full suite ("npm run smoketest"), a focused file ("npm run smoketest -- path/to/test.spec.ts"), and fast iteration ("npm run smoketest-no-compile -- path/to/test.spec.ts"). Workflow steps map directly onto these commands.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The four-step workflow has a clear sequence and a feedback loop ("If failing, inspect traces/logs and isolate the root cause... rerun until stable"), plus a guardrail to re-run passing fixes. Not 5 because there is no explicit validation command or checkpoint (e.g. how to open a Playwright trace, or verifying a fix passes twice before declaring it stable); not 3 because validation is only weakly implicit via the rerun loop and guardrail, not absent.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist), and the body is organized into clearly signaled sections. Per the simple-skill scoring note, well-organized sections alone warrant a 5 with no external references needed.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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.

A concise, action-oriented description with a clear niche, but it omits any "Use when..." trigger guidance and lacks natural synonyms and file extensions users would say (e2e, end-to-end, .spec.ts, flaky). Adding an explicit trigger clause would lift completeness and trigger-term quality substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user mentions smoke tests, e2e/end-to-end tests, Playwright, or asks to verify changes with the smoke suite."

Include natural synonyms and extensions in the description: "end-to-end (e2e)", "spec files (.spec.ts)", "flaky tests".

Optionally mention what failure artifacts look like ("inspect Playwright traces") to sharpen distinctiveness against generic test-debugging skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Run Playwright smoke tests, debug failures, and verify fixes" lists three specific actions within a named domain (Playwright). Not 5 because coverage omits common variations like running subsets via flags or cross-browser runs; not 3 because it goes beyond 1-2 actions with concrete verbs.

4 / 5

Completeness

The description clearly answers "what" (run Playwright smoke tests, debug failures, verify fixes) but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. Not 4 because the "when" is entirely missing rather than just imprecise.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Playwright" and "smoke tests" are relevant keywords a user would say, but common variations and synonyms are missing ("e2e", "end-to-end", "spec", "flaky", ".spec.ts"). Not 4 because several natural trigger phrases users actually use are absent; not 2 because more than one or two generic keywords are present.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Playwright smoke tests" carves out a fairly distinct niche, with only minor overlap risk against generic test-running or CI skills. Not 5 because the absence of distinct trigger phrases leaves moderate overlap with general "run tests" or "debug tests" skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
cursor/plugins
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.