stripe-automation
Automate Stripe tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): customers, charges, subscriptions, invoices, products, refunds. Always search tools first for current schemas.
72
58%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
97%
1.32xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/stripe-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 is strong in specificity and distinctiveness, clearly naming the platform (Stripe), the integration method (Rube MCP/Composio), and the specific entities it handles. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which weakens completeness, and could benefit from more natural user-facing trigger terms like 'payment', 'billing', or 'subscription management'.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Stripe payments, billing, subscription management, or needs to automate Stripe operations.'
Include natural user-facing trigger terms like 'payment', 'billing', 'plan management', 'payment processing' alongside the existing entity list.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete entities/actions: customers, charges, subscriptions, invoices, products, refunds. Also includes a concrete operational instruction ('Always search tools first for current schemas'). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (automate Stripe tasks across multiple entities), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps this at 2 per the rubric guidelines. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good domain keywords like 'Stripe', 'customers', 'charges', 'subscriptions', 'invoices', 'products', 'refunds', but misses common user variations like 'payment', 'billing', 'plan', 'pricing', and the 'Rube MCP (Composio)' terminology is technical jargon unlikely to be used by end users. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very distinct niche: Stripe automation via a specific MCP tool (Rube/Composio). The combination of 'Stripe' + specific entity types + the tooling reference makes it highly unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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 Stripe operations via Rube MCP with good structural organization and useful pitfall warnings for financial operations. However, it suffers from redundancy (amount formatting and pitfalls repeated across sections), lacks concrete executable examples of actual MCP tool calls, and marks every workflow step as [Optional], which undermines the actionability and workflow clarity. The content would benefit from being more opinionated about recommended sequences and including validation checkpoints for financial operations.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete example of an actual RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS call and a subsequent Stripe tool call with real input parameters and expected response structure.
Remove the [Optional] annotations from workflow steps and instead describe the steps as a recommended sequence with branching (e.g., 'If creating a new customer: step 1 → step 2; if updating: step 3').
Add explicit validation/verification steps after destructive or financial operations (e.g., 'After creating a charge, retrieve it to confirm status is succeeded').
Consolidate the duplicated pitfalls (amount units, currency codes) into the single 'Known Pitfalls' section and remove them from individual workflow sections to reduce redundancy.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but has significant redundancy — the 'Known Pitfalls' section repeats amount unit warnings already stated in multiple workflow sections, and the quick reference table largely duplicates information from the core workflows. The ID prefixes and amount formatting sections appear twice in different forms. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Tool names and key parameters are clearly listed, which is helpful. However, there are no executable code examples or concrete MCP call examples showing exact input/output JSON. The instruction to 'Always call RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS first to get current tool schemas' undermines the specificity of the documented tool names since schemas may change. Every step in the workflows is marked [Optional], reducing clarity on what to actually do. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The setup workflow has a clear sequence with a validation checkpoint (confirm ACTIVE status). However, the core workflows lack validation steps — for example, after creating a charge or refund, there's no verification step. For financial operations (charges, refunds, subscriptions), missing validation/feedback loops is a significant gap. Every tool in each workflow being marked [Optional] makes the sequences feel like menus rather than workflows. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear headers and sections, but it's quite long (~180 lines of substantive content) with no bundle files to offload detail into. The quick reference table, common patterns, and known pitfalls sections could be separate reference files. The single external link to Composio docs is appropriate but the skill itself is monolithic. | 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
c911a92
- 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.