mixpanel-automation
Automate Mixpanel tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): events, segmentation, funnels, cohorts, user profiles, JQL queries. Always search tools first for current schemas.
77
66%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
97%
1.29xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/mixpanel-automation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%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 strong description that clearly identifies the tool (Mixpanel via Rube MCP/Composio) and lists specific capabilities. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness. The trigger terms are excellent and highly distinctive for the analytics domain.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Mixpanel analytics, tracking events, building funnels, or querying user behavior data.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: events, segmentation, funnels, cohorts, user profiles, JQL queries. Also specifies the integration method (Rube MCP via Composio) and includes a procedural instruction (search tools first for current schemas). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what does this do' (automate Mixpanel tasks with specific capabilities listed), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The when is only implied by the domain terms. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'Mixpanel', 'events', 'segmentation', 'funnels', 'cohorts', 'user profiles', 'JQL queries'. These are terms analytics users would naturally use when requesting Mixpanel-related tasks. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive — 'Mixpanel', 'Rube MCP', 'Composio', 'JQL queries' are very specific terms that carve out a clear niche. Unlikely to conflict with other skills unless there are multiple Mixpanel-related skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%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 comprehensive catalog of Mixpanel operations via Rube MCP with clear tool sequences and parameter documentation. Its main weaknesses are verbosity through repeated information (date formats, case sensitivity mentioned multiple times), lack of executable examples with actual parameter values, and missing validation/error-recovery steps for destructive operations like batch profile updates.
Suggestions
Add concrete, copy-paste ready tool call examples with sample parameter values for at least the most common workflows (e.g., aggregate events, segmentation)
Add explicit validation and error recovery steps for batch profile updates and other multi-step workflows (e.g., verify profile count before batch update, check response status)
Consolidate repeated pitfalls (date format, case sensitivity, expression syntax) into the single 'Known Pitfalls' section and remove duplicates from individual workflow sections to reduce token count
Extract the Mixpanel Expression Syntax reference and detailed per-workflow parameter docs into a separate REFERENCE.md file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly well-organized but verbose for what it conveys. Many pitfalls and parameter lists repeat information Claude could infer (e.g., 'case-sensitive', 'date format must be YYYY-MM-DD' repeated multiple times). The Known Pitfalls section largely duplicates per-workflow pitfalls. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Tool names and parameter lists are concrete and specific, but there are no executable code examples or copy-paste ready tool invocations with actual parameter values. The 'Common Patterns' section uses pseudocode-style numbered lists rather than actual tool call examples with sample parameters. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step workflows are clearly sequenced with prerequisite/required labels, which is good. However, there are no validation checkpoints or error recovery steps — e.g., no guidance on what to do if an event name doesn't exist, if a query times out, or if batch updates partially fail. For batch profile updates (a destructive operation), missing validation caps this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with headers and a quick reference table, but it's monolithic — all ~180 lines are in one file with no references to separate detailed docs. The expression syntax reference and detailed per-workflow pitfalls could be split into separate files. The single external link to Composio docs is helpful but insufficient for progressive disclosure. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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
7cc63f3
- 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.