auto-claude-troubleshooting

Auto-Claude debugging and troubleshooting guide. Use when fixing installation issues, debugging build failures, resolving agent errors, or diagnosing performance problems.

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/auto-claude-troubleshooting/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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.

A thorough, mostly actionable troubleshooting catalog with good section organization, but it is long and repetitive, runs destructive recovery operations without validation checkpoints, and does not leverage the bundle reference file. Splitting content into reference files and adding verify-before-destruct steps would raise the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints before destructive recovery steps (e.g., confirm the spec ID and back up state before 'rm -rf .auto-claude/specs/001-feature' and 'git branch -D') so workflow_clarity can exceed the destructive-ops cap of 3.

Deduplicate the version-check commands shared between Quick Diagnostics and Getting Help -> Gather Diagnostics, and consider splitting the issue catalog into per-area reference files (installation.md, build-failures.md) to improve conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Either link references/RELEASE.md from the body where relevant or remove it from the bundle, since a present-but-unreferenced (and topically unrelated) reference weakens progressive disclosure signaling.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Per-section command blocks are lean and avoid explaining basic concepts, but the 480-line body is long and repetitive — Quick Diagnostics and Getting Help duplicate the python/node/git version checks, and many sections follow the identical comment-then-command pattern; mostly efficient but could be tightened, matching anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Actionability	Nearly every issue is paired with concrete, mostly copy-paste-ready bash commands, but a few entries are hand-wavy ("Edit agent creation to use max_thinking_tokens=3000", "Add command to allowlist in security.py"), leaving minor gaps that keep it below the fully-executable anchor 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Recovery procedures like Restart Clean and Manual Intervention are sequenced, but destructive/batch operations (rm -rf on specs/worktrees, git branch -D, rm -rf ~/.auto-claude/memories/embeddings) run with no validation or verification checkpoint, which per the rubric caps workflow_clarity at 3 even where steps are otherwise clear.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers are well organized by issue category, but ~480 lines of issue entries are inlined in SKILL.md that could reasonably be split into per-area reference files, and the provided references/RELEASE.md is topically unrelated and never linked from the body, matching the 'some structure, content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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.

A well-formed description with clear third-person voice, explicit what/when structure, and natural trigger terms. Main weakness is that the stated actions are generic troubleshooting verbs tied to problem categories rather than concrete distinct capabilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("Auto-Claude debugging and troubleshooting guide") and four problem categories (installation, build, agent, performance), but the verbs are generic troubleshooting actions rather than concrete capability actions, matching the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; a 4 would require more concrete distinct actions and the coverage leans on problem categories instead.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ("Auto-Claude debugging and troubleshooting guide") and when ("Use when fixing installation issues, debugging build failures, resolving agent errors, or diagnosing performance problems") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrases a user would say — "installation issues", "build failures", "agent errors", "performance problems" — giving good keyword coverage; not a 5 because it lacks synonyms or the kind of filename/extension-level breadth shown in the top anchor.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoping to "Auto-Claude" gives it a clear niche and minimal conflict risk with unrelated skills, but the trigger terms themselves (build failures, performance problems) are generic enough to risk minor overlap with general debugging skills, so it sits between anchors 4 and 5 rather than at 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz
Path: skills/auto-claude-troubleshooting/SKILL.md
Commit: 93ed392

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.