CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

browser-smoke-review

Use browser automation to review docs pages, preview URLs, rendered output, or web-facing fallow surfaces. Use when the user wants a screenshot-based review, browser smoke test, docs site check, or preview deployment inspection.

67

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 body is concise, well-structured, and presents a clear read-only review workflow appropriate for a simple skill. Its main weakness is actionability: the steps describe actions without the specific browser/Playwright commands or APIs that would make them directly executable.

Suggestions

Add concrete Playwright/browser-tool snippets or specific commands for the key steps (e.g., how to open a URL, capture a screenshot, read console logs) so the workflow is copy-paste executable.

Include one or two explicit checkpoints in the workflow, such as verifying the page loaded before inspecting or confirming screenshots captured the intended viewport.

Show a minimal example of what a concrete issue report with page/path context should look like, so the final reporting step is unambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and well under budget, assumes Claude's competence with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, and every line earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient' top anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

The workflow gives concrete actions (open the URL, inspect page structure, capture screenshots, check console errors, report issues) but lacks specific Playwright/browser API calls or commands, so it provides some actionable guidance while missing key executable details — below the 'mostly executable' 4 but above the minimal-hints 2.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five steps are clearly sequenced for a read-only review (no destructive/batch operations, so the validation cap does not apply), with a clear progression and a hand-off note for product feedback, but it lacks explicit checkpoints that would lift it to 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

At under 50 lines with no need for external references, the body is well organized into clearly labeled sections (Good fits, Workflow) with easy navigation, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 concise and clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it, with concrete review surfaces and natural trigger terms. It is slightly held back by the jargon phrase 'web-facing fallow surfaces' and minor overlap with panel-review.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete review surfaces ('review docs pages, preview URLs, rendered output, or web-facing fallow surfaces') which lists multiple specific actions with only minor coverage gaps, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the comprehensive 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (browser automation to review docs pages, preview URLs, rendered output) and 'when' ('Use when the user wants a screenshot-based review, browser smoke test, docs site check, or preview deployment inspection') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes good natural keyword coverage ('screenshot-based review, browser smoke test, docs site check, or preview deployment inspection') that users would actually say, though 'web-facing fallow surfaces' is jargon and a few synonyms are missing, so it is not the comprehensive 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear browser-smoke-review niche with distinct triggers and only minor overlap risk with the related panel-review skill it explicitly mentions combining with, so it sits at 'mostly distinct' rather than the minimal-conflict 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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
fallow-rs/fallow
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.