CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

query-param-name-conflict-api-custom-commands

How to author custom commands for the query-param-name-conflict-api CLI using the co-generated SDK.

60

Quality

70%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./seed/cli/query-param-name-conflict/.agents/skills/custom-commands/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 actionable and well-structured with executable code and a useful regeneration-safety table; its main weakness is a stub SDK-clients section and the absence of an explicit validation step in the workflow.

Suggestions

Replace or remove the empty 'Available SDK Clients' section — either list concrete sub-clients or fold the note into the preceding text so it earns its place.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint such as running `cargo check` or `cargo build` and confirming the command appears in `--help` before declaring the command ready.

Add a brief 'updating after regeneration' micro-checklist that tells Claude to recompile and re-run the custom command to confirm it still works after `fern generate`.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with no padding of concepts Claude already knows; the only slight inefficiency is the stub 'Available SDK Clients' section that adds little, keeping it just below the fully-lean 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides copy-paste-ready, executable Rust code for registering a command plus concrete build/run commands, covering the common case as the 5 anchor requires.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The edit-register-build sequence is clear and the regeneration-safety table is helpful, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint before running; the compiler acts as implicit feedback, fitting the 4 anchor with a minor gap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized (overview, architecture, steps, safety table, build) with no needless external references for this simple skill, but the empty 'Available SDK Clients' subsection is a minor organization gap short of the 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 specific to a single tool and clearly states what it does, but lacks any 'when to use' trigger guidance and relies on technical jargon rather than natural user phrases.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming the natural situations a user would invoke this skill (e.g., extending the query-param-name-conflict-api CLI).

Include a few concrete actions beyond 'author' (e.g., register, wire SDK calls, preserve code across regeneration) to lift specificity.

Add natural-language synonyms users might say (e.g., 'add a command', 'extend the CLI') alongside the technical terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('custom commands', 'CLI', 'co-generated SDK') and one concrete action ('author') but does not list several specific actions, matching the 3 anchor and falling short of the multi-action 4 anchor.

3 / 5

Completeness

It gives a clear 'what' (authoring custom commands via the SDK) but has no 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'custom commands', 'CLI', and 'SDK' are relevant but lean technical; common natural phrasings a user would say are missing, fitting the 3 anchor rather than the good-coverage 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tied to a single named CLI ('query-param-name-conflict-api'), it occupies a clear niche with minimal overlap risk, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

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
fern-api/fern
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.