dropbox-automation
Automate Dropbox file management, sharing, search, uploads, downloads, and folder operations via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
75
65%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
1.51xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/dropbox-automation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 does a good job listing specific Dropbox operations and identifying the integration platform, making it distinctive. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause that would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill, and some of the terminology (Rube MCP, Composio) is implementation-specific rather than user-facing language.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to upload, download, share, or organize files in Dropbox, or mentions Dropbox cloud storage.'
Include more natural user-facing trigger terms like 'cloud storage', 'share a link', 'Dropbox folder', or 'sync files' to improve matching with how users phrase requests.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: file management, sharing, search, uploads, downloads, and folder operations. Also specifies the platform (Dropbox) and tooling (Rube MCP/Composio). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (Dropbox file management, sharing, search, etc.) but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The 'when' is only implied by the listed capabilities. Per rubric guidelines, missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good keywords like 'Dropbox', 'file management', 'sharing', 'search', 'uploads', 'downloads', and 'folder operations', but misses common user variations like 'cloud storage', 'sync files', 'share a link', or file extension mentions. The mention of 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon users wouldn't naturally say. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clearly scoped to Dropbox specifically, with the additional qualifier of Rube MCP (Composio) as the integration method. This is a distinct niche unlikely to conflict with other file management skills targeting different platforms. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured Dropbox automation skill with clear workflow sequences, good validation checkpoints, and useful pitfall documentation. Its main weaknesses are significant content repetition (pitfalls and parameters restated in multiple sections), lack of concrete executable examples showing actual MCP tool invocations, and all content being packed into a single large file rather than using progressive disclosure with supporting files.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 concrete MCP call examples with actual sample payloads (e.g., a complete RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS invocation followed by a DROPBOX_SEARCH_FILE_OR_FOLDER call) to improve actionability.
Consolidate repeated pitfalls (base64 encoding, path formats, shared link conflicts) into the 'Known Pitfalls' section only, and reference that section from individual workflows instead of duplicating.
Extract the detailed parameter lists and quick reference table into a separate REFERENCE.md file, keeping SKILL.md focused on workflows and key parameters only.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly comprehensive but includes significant repetition—pitfalls about base64 encoding, path formats, and shared link conflicts are repeated across individual workflows AND in the 'Known Pitfalls' section. The quick reference table largely duplicates information already covered in the workflows. Some parameter descriptions are useful but could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides specific tool names, parameter names, and key values, which is good. However, there are no executable code examples or concrete MCP call examples showing actual invocations with sample payloads. The guidance is specific enough to act on but falls short of copy-paste ready examples that would earn a 3. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Each workflow has a clear numbered tool sequence with explicit annotations ([Required], [Optional], [Prerequisite]), prerequisite validation steps (e.g., check metadata before creating links, check existing links before creating new ones), and feedback loops for async/batch operations (poll with check tools). The sharing workflow explicitly includes validation checkpoints to prevent 409 errors. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic single file with no bundle files or references to supplementary documents. For a skill of this length (~250+ lines), the detailed parameter lists and pitfalls for each workflow could be split into separate reference files. The structure within the file is good (sections, table), but everything is inline rather than appropriately distributed. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- davepoon/buildwithclaude
- Commit
d065ead
- 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.