CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

quality-scan

Run a scoped, read-only quality scan and report exact-candidate evidence, failures and frozen debt. Use for an ad-hoc gate sweep or release preparation; a static scan is not full release acceptance.

Quality

92%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

96%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.

An exemplary instruction-style skill: lean, guardrail-dense, fully executable main path with copy-paste evidence capture, and a clearly sequenced choose→execute→report workflow with explicit validation checkpoints. The only weakness is that its two cross-skill references point outside the bundle and cannot be verified within it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, imperative, and assumes Claude's competence — e.g. "Never substitute a remembered count for this inventory", "An alias, workflow job, matrix instance and test case are different units" — with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every sentence is a guardrail or instruction, matching anchor 5 ("every token earns its place") rather than 4, which requires over-explanation that could be trimmed.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete commands are named ("npm run check:gate-manifest", "npm run quality:scan", "npm run check:quality-skill-contract") and the bash block with mktemp, exit-code capture, and log path is copy-paste ready and covers the common execution case, matching anchor 5. Vague spots like "the gate process supervisor when the candidate provides it" are conditional fallbacks, not gaps in the main path.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three sections form a clear sequence (choose scope → execute and preserve evidence → report) with explicit validation checkpoints: capture "the command's own exit before displaying a summary", "Missing dependencies, timeout, cancellation and unavailable artifacts are incomplete evidence, not PASS", and error-recovery direction via "use the causal comparison in the shared base-green protocol". This matches anchor 5; the batch/destructive cap does not apply since the scan is read-only and exit-code interpretation is explicitly validated.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single-file body is well organized with clear section headers and clearly signaled one-level-deep references ("Read `../_shared/base-green.md` before interpreting base or PR health", "use `../validate-release-green/SKILL.md` for the local observer's limited scope"). However those referenced sibling files are not part of the bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist), so the skill depends on unverified external context — a minor organization gap that keeps it below anchor 5's fully self-contained, easy navigation.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 strong description: it explicitly answers both what and when with concrete triggers and third-person voice, and actively disambiguates itself from full release acceptance. Minor room remains in trigger-term variations and enumerating the scan's concrete outputs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Run a scoped, read-only quality scan and report exact-candidate evidence, failures and frozen debt" lists several concrete actions (run scan, report evidence/failures/frozen debt) in third person, but coverage of what the scan entails (profiles, gates, counts) is not enumerated — matching anchor 4 ("lists several specific actions; minor gaps") rather than 5's comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is explicit ("Run a scoped, read-only quality scan and report exact-candidate evidence, failures and frozen debt") and the 'when' is explicit with concrete trigger phrases ("Use for an ad-hoc gate sweep or release preparation"), plus a boundary clarification ("a static scan is not full release acceptance") — matching anchor 5.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases a user would say are present — "quality scan", "ad-hoc gate sweep", "release preparation" — giving good keyword coverage. A few natural variations are missing (e.g. "quality gate", "release readiness", "pre-release checks"), so it fits anchor 4 rather than 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Scoped, read-only quality scan" carves a clear niche and the caveat "a static scan is not full release acceptance" explicitly disambiguates from release-acceptance skills. However "release preparation" still invites minor overlap with closely related release-validation skills, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5's minimal conflict risk.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

diegosouzapw/OmniRoute

Path

config/quality/skill-templates/quality-scan/SKILL.md

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.