CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

debug-false-positive

Diagnose and fix a Fallow false positive or false negative through extraction, resolution, graph, analysis, reporting, and real-consumer verification.

66

Quality

83%

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

88%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 an exemplary lean debugging procedure: tight, concrete, and sequenced with real validation and a premise-checking feedback loop. Its only weaknesses are small — an implicit binary name, no example commands, and an inline external doc pointer.

Suggestions

Name the executable in step 1 (e.g., "fallow check --format json --quiet") and give one example reproduce-command skeleton to make guidance fully copy-paste ready.

Move the docs/development/quality-gates.md pointer into a clearly signaled reference (or verify it exists at that path) so the single external link is navigable rather than buried mid-step.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

About 25 lines with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; even asides like "A release build adds a slow LTO link and gives the same findings" are project-specific facts that earn their tokens, matching the lean anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete commands and specifics are present ("--format json --quiet", "cargo build -p fallow-cli", cleared ".fallow/" cache, "3 to 5 ranked hypotheses"), but the executable name in step 1 is implicit and no example command or fixture format is given, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

An 8-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (reproduce before changing code, a regression test that must fail without the fix, old-versus-new comparison on a real consumer) and an error-recovery loop ("After 3 failed fixes, stop and write down the premise that they share").

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The short self-contained body is well organized as a single procedure, but its sole external pointer ("docs/development/quality-gates.md") is embedded mid-step rather than clearly signaled, and no references/ bundle exists to verify it — a minor organization gap rather than a fully clean structure.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 states a clear, third-person, tool-specific purpose with good trigger phrasing, but it omits any explicit "when to use" guidance, which caps its completeness. Adding a Use-when clause with a few natural synonyms would lift it to the top band.

Suggestions

Append a trigger clause such as "Use when a Fallow run reports a wrong or missed finding, or when the user calls something a false positive/false negative."

Add natural synonyms users might say ("wrong result", "spurious finding", "missed issue") to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Consider naming the CLI (e.g., "fallow check") so the capability description is fully concrete.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain plus several concrete action areas ("extraction, resolution, graph, analysis, reporting, and real-consumer verification"), matching the anchor for several specific actions with minor gaps; terms like "analysis" keep it short of comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear ("Diagnose and fix a Fallow false positive or false negative through..."), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"false positive or false negative" is the natural phrase users say when they need this skill, but common variations ("wrong result", "spurious finding", "missed issue") are missing, so coverage is good rather than comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoping to a named tool ("Fallow") with the distinct false-positive/false-negative framing carves a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against other skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

fallow-rs/fallow

Path

.agents/skills/debug-false-positive/SKILL.md

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.