CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

review-vocabulary

Review and rewrite the prose a branch adds — docstrings, comments, user-facing messages, docs — against dlt's fixed vocabulary and Simplified Technical English. Invoke as /review-vocabulary.

63

Quality

75%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/review-vocabulary/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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.

The content is a well-structured, executable guide for a complex prose-review task: concrete commands, real code, a sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints, and properly offloaded reference files. Minor gaps are an uncited bundled checklist file and a few passages that could be tighter.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and domain-specific with no padding about concepts Claude already knows — every table, ruling, and edge case earns its place — though a few explanatory passages (e.g., the snippet-as-both-tests-and-docs consequences) could be tightened slightly.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance: `git diff <base>`, `make format`, `make lint`, a real AST-strip Python snippet, grep patterns (`match=`, `in str(exc`, `in str(reject`), and specific code references (`_no_data_location(reason)` in `dlt/common/destination/client.py`), with only minor gaps (no exact command for the grep sweep).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-phase workflow (Audit → Apply → Verify) with an explicit 'Stop. Wait for approval.' checkpoint and a detailed Verify section (a–e) including feedback loops (prose-only AST check, format, lint, run tests, and the assertion-breaking trap); because it includes explicit validation for this batch/destructive operation, it is not subject to the cap.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md acts as an overview with one-level-deep references that exist ('references/simple-english.md', 'references/simple-english-use-cases.md'), appropriately offloading the 53 STE rules; navigation is signaled via the 'Read first' list, but 'references/simple-english-checklist.md' is present in the bundle yet uncited from the body.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

The description is specific and distinct, naming concrete targets and the two governing standards, but it omits an explicit 'when to use' clause, leaving the trigger implicit and capping completeness. Adding a brief 'Use when...' sentence would raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when reviewing the prose a branch adds to dlt — docstrings, comments, messages, or docs.'

Include the natural trigger phrase 'review vocabulary' or 'STE / Simplified Technical English review' to broaden keyword coverage.

Mention the rewrite outputs (renames test ids, restructures messages, deletes redundant comments) so the 'what' is comprehensive.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete actions ('Review and rewrite') and enumerates specific targets — 'docstrings, comments, user-facing messages, docs' — plus the two governing standards (dlt's fixed vocabulary, Simplified Technical English), but does not enumerate the kinds of rewrites it performs, leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear ('Review and rewrite the prose a branch adds'), but there is no 'Use when...' clause — 'Invoke as /review-vocabulary' conveys how, not when, so the 'when' is only weakly implied; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms a maintainer would say ('prose', 'docstrings', 'comments', 'user-facing messages', 'docs', 'vocabulary') and an explicit invocation trigger ('Invoke as /review-vocabulary'), though it lacks common synonyms or extension variants.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is sharply defined (dlt's fixed vocabulary and Simplified Technical English applied to branch-added prose), giving it clear, distinct triggers with minimal risk of firing for an unrelated skill.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
dlt-hub/dlt
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.