CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

webhook-audience-test-custom-commands

How to author custom commands for the webhook-audience-test CLI using the co-generated SDK.

58

Quality

66%

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/webhook-audience/.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 well-structured, concise, and provides executable Rust examples and clear regeneration-safety guidance. Its main weakness is the placeholder 'Available SDK Clients' section, which promises detail it does not deliver.

Suggestions

Replace the 'Available SDK Clients' stub with an actual listing of sub-clients and representative methods, or move it to a referenced file if the surface is large.

Add a brief validation checkpoint after editing custom.rs (e.g. 'cargo check' before full build) to make the workflow's verification explicit.

Trim mild marketing phrasing like 'zero configuration required' to keep the overview purely informational.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Rust/clap/cargo competence, with minor padding such as 'zero configuration required' and a stub 'Available SDK Clients' line that add little, fitting 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed'.

4 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready Rust for register(), client(), and block_on() plus concrete build/test commands give mostly executable guidance; the 'Available SDK Clients' section is a stub that leaves a minor gap in available methods.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Adding a Custom Command' section sequences steps 1-3 and the Build & Test section provides a verification checkpoint (cargo build, RUST_LOG=debug), with only minor validation gaps and no destructive/batch operation triggering the cap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

With no bundle files present, the body is well-organized into clear sections (Overview, Architecture, Adding a Command, Regeneration Safety table, Build & Test); the stub sub-clients section is the only minor organization gap.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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 distinct niche but reads as a 'how to' statement rather than a capability-plus-trigger description. It lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps its completeness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause stating when to invoke this skill, e.g. 'Use when extending the webhook-audience-test CLI with new commands.'

Expand the capability phrasing from 'How to author' to concrete verbs ('Authors, registers, and wires custom commands...') to lift specificity.

Include natural trigger synonyms a user might say, such as 'add a command', 'extend the CLI', or 'custom subcommand'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a concrete domain ('author custom commands for the webhook-audience-test CLI') and one method ('using the co-generated SDK'), but does not list several specific actions, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states the 'what' but has no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance; per the rubric a missing 'when' clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords ('custom commands', 'CLI', 'SDK') are present and tied to the named product, but common variations or synonyms a user might say are missing, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tying the skill to the specifically-named 'webhook-audience-test CLI' gives it a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, matching the top 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.