clean-code

Pragmatic coding standards - concise, direct, no over-engineering, no unnecessary comments

Quality

48%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./docs/v19.7/configuration/agent/skills_external/antigravity-awesome-skills-main/skills/clean-code/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is clean-code in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Quality

Content

52%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 well-structured with useful checklists and a clear feedback-loop workflow, but it spends many tokens re-explaining clean-code fundamentals Claude already knows and lacks executable examples plus locally available verification scripts.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the tables that restate well-known principles (SRP/DRY/KISS/YAGNI, basic naming conventions) to assume Claude's competence.

Add at least one concrete before/after code example demonstrating the core rules in action.

Move the large Agent→Script mapping table to a separate reference file (e.g. references/script-mapping.md) and link to it, since no scripts/ bundle exists for this skill itself.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body extensively restates concepts Claude already knows (SRP, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, Boy Scout, naming conventions, guard clauses) across many tables, fitting 'noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections'; it is not 3 because the padding is pervasive rather than incidental.	2 / 5
Actionability	Rules are concrete (e.g. 'Max 20 lines', 'Max 3 arguments', 'SCREAMING_SNAKE'), but there are essentially no executable code examples for the core rules, and the verification scripts reference other skills' scripts that are not present in this bundle, fitting 'some concrete guidance but incomplete'; not 4 because executable examples and locally available commands are missing.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 'Script Output Handling (READ → SUMMARIZE → ASK)' section is a clear feedback-loop workflow (run → parse → summarize → wait → re-run after fix) and the 'Self-Check Before Completing' checklist adds validation, matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; not 5 because some checkpoints are implicit and the overall skill is a standards doc rather than a single coherent process.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-organized into clearly headed sections separated by rules, with no bundle files present and no nested references, fitting 'good structure; most content appropriately placed'; not 5 because the large Agent→Script mapping table referencing other skills is inlined where a separate reference might improve navigation.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

45%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 conveys a clear domain and style but lacks concrete actions, natural trigger phrases, and an explicit 'Use when' clause, capping completeness at 3 and leaving it somewhat generic relative to other coding skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when writing or refactoring code to keep it clean and minimal.'

List concrete actions the skill performs rather than only adjectives (e.g. 'Enforces small functions, clear naming, guard clauses, and inlining of one-liners').

Include natural trigger terms users say such as 'clean code', 'code quality', 'refactor', or 'code review'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('coding standards') but lists stylistic properties ('concise, direct, no over-engineering, no unnecessary comments') rather than concrete actions, matching the 'names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' anchor; it does not reach 3 because no clear concrete actions are enumerated.	2 / 5
Completeness	It has a clear 'what' (pragmatic coding standards) but no explicit 'when'/'Use when' trigger guidance, so per the cap rule completeness cannot exceed 3; it is not 2 because the 'what' is reasonably clear.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'coding standards' is a phrase a user might say, but common synonyms like 'clean code', 'code quality', or 'refactoring' are missing, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor; not 4 because keyword coverage is thin.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Coding standards' is a broad niche that could overlap with many code-related skills, matching 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills'; it is not 4 because the phrasing does not carve out a clearly distinct trigger.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: duclm1x1/Dive-Ai
Path: docs/v19.7/configuration/agent/skills_external/antigravity-awesome-skills-main/skills/clean-code/SKILL.md
Commit: 20ba150

Reviewed: ~17 hours 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.