CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

reserved-keyword-cli-custom-commands

How to author custom commands for the reserved-keyword-cli CLI using the co-generated SDK.

56

Quality

64%

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/cli-reserved-keywords/with-wire-tests/.agents/skills/custom-commands/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 efficient, actionable, and well-structured with executable Rust examples and a clear edit-build-run workflow. Main gaps are the thin SDK client coverage and the lack of an explicit validation feedback loop, both minor.

Suggestions

Expand the Available SDK Clients table beyond the single `client.models` row, or point to a generated reference for the full client surface.

Add a brief validation checkpoint after `cargo build` (e.g. handle compile errors, then re-run) to make the workflow a feedback loop.

Add one example covering a mutating operation (create/update) so the SDK usage pattern is comprehensive, not just reads.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, assumes Rust/clap/cargo competence, and avoids explaining known concepts; minor redundancy between the register() example and the Key Patterns section keeps it just below a 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides complete, executable Rust code and concrete cargo commands with specific file paths, but the SDK clients table lists only one sub-client (models) and lacks create/update examples, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The edit → build → run sequence is clear with a debugging tip (RUST_LOG=debug), though validation is implicit (no compile-error feedback loop or test assertion), matching score 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clear sections (Overview, Architecture, Adding a Custom Command, Regeneration Safety, Build & Test) with easy navigation and no nested references; at ~110 inline lines it is just above the simple-skill threshold, so a 5 is not warranted.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 and tied to a distinct named CLI, but it omits any "Use when..." trigger guidance, which caps completeness and limits trigger-term quality. Adding an explicit use-when clause with natural synonyms would raise the score.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when adding or modifying custom commands for the reserved-keyword-cli CLI."

Include natural synonyms users might say (e.g. "CLI plugins", "user commands", "custom subcommands") to broaden trigger coverage.

Mention 1-2 more concrete actions (e.g. register commands, wire SDK calls) to lift specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and a concrete action ("author custom commands") plus a concrete mechanism ("using the co-generated SDK"), but lists only 1-2 actions and is not comprehensive, matching the score-3 anchor.

3 / 5

Completeness

Gives a clear "what" (author custom commands via the co-generated SDK) but has no "Use when..." or equivalent trigger clause, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant keywords ("custom commands", "CLI", "SDK") a user might say, but is jargon-heavy and missing common synonyms or variations, fitting the score-3 anchor rather than 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The named proprietary tool ("reserved-keyword-cli") gives it a clear niche with low conflict risk, but the absence of explicit trigger guidance leaves minor overlap risk with other CLI/SDK skills, fitting score 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.