coding-standards
Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development.
56
Quality
45%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./docs/v19.7/configuration/agent/skills_external/antigravity-awesome-skills-main/skills/cc-skill-coding-standards/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies its technology domain but relies heavily on vague terms like 'best practices' and 'patterns' without concrete actions. The critical weakness is the complete absence of explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over other coding-related skills.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when reviewing code style, enforcing conventions, or asking about TypeScript/React best practices'
Replace vague terms with specific actions: instead of 'best practices and patterns', list concrete capabilities like 'enforce naming conventions, apply consistent formatting, structure components'
Include natural user phrases as triggers: 'code review', 'style guide', 'how should I structure', 'naming convention', 'linting'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (coding standards) and technologies (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js), but uses vague terms like 'best practices' and 'patterns' without listing concrete actions like 'enforce naming conventions' or 'apply linting rules'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what (coding standards/best practices) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant technology keywords (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) that users might mention, but lacks natural trigger phrases users would say like 'code review', 'style guide', 'formatting', or 'conventions'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The technology stack provides some specificity, but 'coding standards' and 'best practices' are generic enough to potentially conflict with other development-related skills covering the same languages. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides excellent, actionable code examples with clear good/bad comparisons that Claude can directly apply. However, it's overly verbose with explanations of concepts Claude already knows (basic principles, what DRY means), and the monolithic structure makes it token-inefficient. The content would benefit from being split into focused sub-files with this serving as a navigation hub.
Suggestions
Remove or drastically shorten the 'Code Quality Principles' section - Claude knows KISS, DRY, YAGNI concepts; just reference them by name if needed
Split into separate files: TYPESCRIPT.md, REACT.md, API-DESIGN.md, TESTING.md - keep SKILL.md as a brief overview with links
Add a workflow section explaining when to apply which standards (e.g., 'Before committing: run through Code Smell checklist')
Remove explanatory text around code examples - the good/bad comparisons are self-explanatory
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill contains useful patterns but includes explanations Claude already knows (KISS, DRY, YAGNI definitions, basic principles like 'code is read more than written'). The code examples are good but the surrounding explanations add unnecessary tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Excellent executable code examples throughout - TypeScript/JavaScript patterns, React components, API designs, and test structures are all copy-paste ready with clear good/bad comparisons. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Content is well-organized into logical sections, but lacks explicit workflows for when/how to apply these standards. No validation checkpoints or decision trees for choosing between patterns. The 'Code Smell Detection' section hints at process but doesn't provide a clear workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a monolithic 400+ line document with no references to external files for detailed topics. API design, testing, React patterns, and performance could each be separate files with SKILL.md providing an overview and navigation. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (522 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- duclm1x1/Dive-Ai
- Commit
20ba150
- 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.