file-form

Handle small bureaucratic tasks — jury duty responses, parking tickets, passport renewals, DMV forms, permit applications, and other government or administrative paperwork.

Quality

76%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./examples/file-form/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

82%

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 is a strong description with excellent specificity and natural trigger terms that users would actually say. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know precisely when to select this skill. The domain is well-defined and distinctive.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user needs help drafting responses to jury duty summons, contesting parking tickets, filling out government forms, or navigating administrative paperwork processes.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions and examples: jury duty responses, parking tickets, passport renewals, DMV forms, permit applications, and other government/administrative paperwork.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers 'what does this do' with specific examples of bureaucratic tasks, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps this at 2 per the rubric.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes highly natural keywords users would actually say: 'jury duty', 'parking tickets', 'passport renewals', 'DMV forms', 'permit applications', 'government paperwork', 'administrative paperwork'. These are all terms a user would naturally use.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche of government/administrative bureaucratic paperwork is very distinct and unlikely to conflict with other skills. The specific examples like jury duty, DMV forms, and parking tickets clearly carve out a unique domain.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Implementation

70%

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 workflow skill with clear sequencing, good validation checkpoints, and appropriate branching logic for different submission channels. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (tone-coaching and redundant encouragement) and a lack of concrete, executable examples — the skill describes what to do at each step but doesn't provide specific artifacts like example summary cards, letter templates, or tool invocation patterns. The actionability would benefit from at least one worked example end-to-end.

Suggestions

Remove or consolidate the tone-setting instructions ('be warm and reassuring', 'act like a concierge') into a single brief line — Claude doesn't need repeated coaching on demeanor.

Add a concrete example of a completed summary card (step 7) so Claude knows the exact format expected.

Include at least one worked example showing the full flow for a common task (e.g., jury duty postponement) with specific tool calls and expected outputs.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary padding — phrases like 'Act like a concierge — patient, thorough, and always making this feel less painful than it actually is' and 'Bureaucracy is stressful — your job is to make it feel manageable' are tone-setting fluff that Claude doesn't need. The enumerated task list in step 1 is somewhat verbose but provides useful scope. The warm/reassuring instruction at the end is redundant with the opening.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides a clear procedural flow with specific tool references (ask_user_input_v0) and concrete steps, but lacks executable code, specific form URLs, or concrete examples of outputs (e.g., what a summary card looks like, what a drafted letter looks like). The guidance for 'research the exact process' and 'navigate the portal' is directional rather than concrete — it tells Claude what to do conceptually but not how to execute it with specific tools or commands.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints — step 2 presents a plan for approval, step 4 flags ambiguities for confirmation, step 7 requires explicit OK before submission, and step 8 provides a fallback/error recovery path. The branching logic (online/phone/mail) is well-structured. The summary card in step 7 serves as a pre-submission validation checklist.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a skill with no bundle files and a single-purpose scope, the content is well-organized with clear sections (flow steps, branching paths, summary card format). The skill is under 60 lines and doesn't need external references — everything is appropriately contained in one file with logical structure.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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.

Repository: douglasvought/wiggle-skills
Commit: b27906e

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.