CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

template-validation

Validates custom dotnet new templates for correctness before publishing. Catches missing fields, parameter bugs, shortName conflicts, constraint issues, and common authoring mistakes that cause templates to fail silently. USE FOR: checking template.json files for errors before publishing or testing, diagnosing why a template doesn't appear after installation, reviewing template parameter definitions for type mismatches and missing defaults, finding shortName conflicts with dotnet CLI commands, validating post-action and constraint configuration. DO NOT USE FOR: finding or using existing templates (use template-discovery), creating projects from templates (use template-instantiation), creating templates from existing projects (use template-authoring).

76

Quality

95%

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

90%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.

A high-quality, actionable validation skill body: compact rule tables, a clear sequenced workflow with an explicit parse/validation checkpoint, and a decisive reporting format that requires concrete fixes. Minor room for improvement only in explicit fix→re-validate feedback and in possibly splitting the dense rule tables into a reference file.

Suggestions

Add an explicit optional 'fix and re-validate' loop after reporting, so users who want to remediate in place have a clear re-run path (would lift workflow_clarity toward 5).

Consider moving the eight detailed Validation Rules tables into a references/ file (e.g. RULES.md) referenced from the body, keeping SKILL.md as a tighter overview — this would improve progressive_disclosure scoring.

The 'Common Pitfalls' table partly duplicates the Validation Rules; trimming it to only the pitfalls not already covered as rules would reduce redundancy and lift conciseness marginally.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Dense and well-organized; assumes Claude knows dotnet/template.json basics with no concept preamble, uses compact tables for rules, and explicitly justifies the only version-dependent list ('illustrative only... the live dotnet new --help output is canonical'). Every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Highly actionable instruction guidance: each rule names the exact JSON field, condition, and severity, and the report format mandates a concrete fix per ERROR/WARNING with worked examples (e.g. 'Rename to a distinctive value, e.g. "my-list"', 'Set a numeric default, e.g. "3"'). Fully executable as a validation procedure.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-step workflow (Locate → Parse/validate → Report) with an explicit checkpoint ('Run all 8 validation categories... Collect errors, warnings, and suggestions separately') and a decisive verdict+table report shape. Falls just short of 5 because there is no fix→re-validate feedback loop, which is appropriate for a read-only review skill but keeps it below the explicit-feedback-loop anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A self-contained SKILL.md with no bundle files, well-organized into clear sections (When to Use, Inputs, 8 Validation Rules, Workflow, Common Pitfalls, More Info). The long rule tables are core load-bearing content rather than deep-dive material that belongs in a separate reference, so it lands at 4 rather than 5; external links are supplementary, not load-bearing.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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, well-scoped description: it states concrete capabilities, lists natural trigger phrases under USE FOR, and disambiguates from sibling skills via DO NOT USE FOR. It is concise despite its length, with no fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (dotnet new templates) and multiple concrete actions: 'Catches missing fields, parameter bugs, shortName conflicts, constraint issues', expanded by detailed USE FOR actions (diagnosing non-appearance, reviewing parameter definitions, finding shortName conflicts, validating post-action/constraint config) — comprehensive coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'what' ('Validates custom dotnet new templates for correctness... Catches missing fields, parameter bugs...') AND 'when' via a concrete 'USE FOR:' trigger list with a 'DO NOT USE FOR' routing clause — clearly and explicitly both with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ('check template.json files for errors', 'template doesn't appear after installation', 'shortName conflicts') plus the literal file path 'template.json' and synonyms; comprehensive coverage matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (dotnet template validation) and explicitly routes adjacent needs away to sibling skills (template-discovery, template-instantiation, template-authoring), giving minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
dotnet/skills
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.