Use when you need to watch, observe, or react to human terminal activity. Examples: "monitor the terminal for errors", "watch what the user is doing and provide help", "audit terminal activity for security issues".
60
70%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/monitor/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%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 description has strong trigger terms and completeness with a clear 'Use when' clause and multiple natural-language examples. Its main weakness is that the specific capabilities (what exactly it does when monitoring) could be more concrete — it describes the general activity (watch, observe, react) but not the specific outputs or actions taken. Overall it's a solid description that would perform well in skill selection.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions describing what the skill produces, e.g., 'Monitors terminal output for errors, suggests fixes, logs command history, and flags security concerns.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (terminal activity monitoring) and some actions (watch, observe, react), but doesn't list specific concrete capabilities like logging commands, detecting error patterns, or providing real-time suggestions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (watch, observe, react to human terminal activity) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when' clause and multiple example trigger phrases covering different use cases. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'monitor the terminal', 'watch what the user is doing', 'audit terminal activity', 'errors', 'security issues', 'provide help'. Good coverage of variations. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The focus on monitoring/watching human terminal activity is a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. The combination of 'terminal', 'monitor', 'watch', and 'audit' creates a distinct trigger profile. | 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 is a well-structured conceptual guide for terminal monitoring that covers detection patterns, response calibration, and practical recipes. Its main weaknesses are the lack of executable code examples (pseudocode dominates) and some verbosity in sections that explain concepts Claude would already understand. The skill would benefit from concrete, copy-paste-ready implementations of at least the polling loop and one recipe.
Suggestions
Replace pseudocode polling loops with executable code using actual wsh_* tool calls or curl commands, so Claude can copy-paste a working monitoring loop.
Add a concrete, executable example for event subscription via WebSocket, including connection setup and event handling, rather than describing it abstractly.
Trim the 'Calibration Principles' and 'Pitfalls' sections — much of this is general assistant behavior Claude already knows (don't be noisy, respect privacy, don't repeat yourself). Keep only the domain-specific guidance like polling frequency recommendations and terminal dimension awareness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably well-written but includes some unnecessary elaboration. Sections like 'Monitoring is only useful if you know what to look for' and explanations of what polling vs event subscription are could be tightened. The calibration principles and pitfalls sections, while useful, contain advice Claude likely already understands (e.g., don't be noisy, respect privacy). However, the domain-specific patterns and recipes earn their tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides good conceptual guidance with concrete pattern examples (error strings to match, dangerous commands to intercept) and visual recipes using box-drawing characters. However, it lacks executable code — the pseudocode blocks ('read screen / analyze what changed / respond if needed') are not copy-paste ready, and the event subscription approach is described abstractly without concrete implementation. The recipes show desired output but not the actual API calls or tool invocations to produce them. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The two approaches (polling vs event subscription) are clearly distinguished, and the polling loop is sequenced. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints — for example, no guidance on verifying that overlays rendered correctly, that event subscriptions are active, or how to handle connection failures. The recipes show what to do but not how to verify it worked or recover from failures. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references other skills ('see the wsh:visual-feedback skill', 'see the core skill for connection mechanics') which is good progressive disclosure. However, with no bundle files provided, these references are unverifiable. The document itself is quite long (~250 lines) and some sections (like the full list of monitoring recipes) could potentially be split into a separate reference file. The overall structure with clear headers is good but the content is somewhat monolithic. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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.
4863aaf
Table of Contents
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.