CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

gemini-cli

Integrate Gemini AI CLI into Claude Code for AI collaboration, code analysis, and tool execution. Use when working with Gemini AI, Google AI, multimodal tasks, or needing advanced AI capabilities.

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/gemini-cli/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%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 rich in executable, copy-paste-ready commands and contains genuinely good collaboration patterns (Think-Act-Observe, iterative decomposition, dry-run preview). However, it is severely overlong for a SKILL.md, repeats its own safety guidance multiple times, and its closing Examples showcase exactly the risky one-shot YOLO workflows the skill itself forbids.

Suggestions

Cut the body to a lean overview (~100 lines): keep install/auth/basic usage, one YOLO safety table, and the Think-Act-Observe pattern; move configuration, troubleshooting, and the examples into references/ files linked with 'See [X.md](X.md)' navigation.

Rewrite or delete the four 'Examples' one-shot YOLO scripts — they are batch/destructive workflows with no validation steps and directly contradict the 'NEVER Use YOLO For' guidance; replace them with the iterative Claude-orchestrated pattern already demonstrated in Sequential Task Decomposition.

Deduplicate YOLO guidance into a single section and consolidate the 'When to Use', 'Best Practices', and 'Tool Execution' sections, which currently repeat the same safety advice three times.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The 660-line body is noticeably padded: the 'When to Use' section repeats the frontmatter description, YOLO safety guidance is restated across 'YOLO Mode', 'Best Practices > Security', and 'Tool Execution', and the four 'Examples' are near-duplicate giant one-shot prompt walls. It avoids anchor 1 only because it does not explain concepts Claude already knows — the padding is repetition, not education — and it embeds time-sensitive specifics (gemini-2.5-flash/pro, '60 req/min, 1000 req/day') outside any deprecation section.

2 / 5

Actionability

Nearly all guidance is copy-paste-ready bash — install ("npm install -g @google/gemini-cli"), auth ("export GEMINI_API_KEY=..."), usage flags, a complete settings.json example, and troubleshooting commands. Falls short of anchor 5 due to minor gaps: `gemini mcp add` is shown with no arguments, `claude-cli` is assumed as an available binary, and `gemini changelog`/`gemini usage` are unverified commands.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Think-Act-Observe loop and Sequential Task Decomposition patterns show clear sequencing with explicit review checkpoints and an error-handling feedback loop, but validation is inconsistent: the 'Examples' section presents destructive/batch workflows ('Daily Development Automation' ending in 'Commit and push changes', full framework migration) as single YOLO commands with zero verification steps, contradicting the body's own 'NEVER Use YOLO For' list. Per the rubric's cap, batch operations without validation cap this at 3 even though earlier sections sequence well.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single 660-line file with no bundle files at all: reference material that clearly belongs in separate files (settings.json configuration, environment variables, troubleshooting, the Examples section) is fully inlined. Clear ## / ### headers provide real structure (above anchor 2's 'no section headers' example), but the monolithic sizing and a 'Related Skills' list pointing to unverifiable skills keep it below anchor 4.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 answers both what and when with a distinct, tool-specific niche. Its weaknesses are generic action language ('AI collaboration'), missing natural trigger variations like 'Gemini CLI', and a vague 'advanced AI capabilities' trigger that inflates scope.

Suggestions

Replace generic actions with the body's concrete capabilities, e.g. "Runs Gemini CLI prompts for code analysis, multimodal image analysis, documentation generation, and web research within Claude Code workflows."

Add natural trigger variations users would actually say — "Gemini CLI", "gemini command", "compare Claude and Gemini outputs" — and drop the vague "or needing advanced AI capabilities" clause that could over-trigger.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ("Integrate Gemini AI CLI into Claude Code") plus a few actions ("AI collaboration, code analysis, and tool execution"), but 'AI collaboration' is generic and coverage is incomplete relative to the body's actual capabilities (multimodal analysis, web research, checkpointing). Matches anchor 3 — 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive — rather than 4, which requires several specific actions with only minor gaps.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' ("Integrate Gemini AI CLI into Claude Code for AI collaboration, code analysis, and tool execution") and an explicit 'when' ("Use when working with Gemini AI, Google AI, multimodal tasks..."), but the when-clause could be more specific — it omits concrete cases the body covers (model comparison, MCP integration, documentation generation). Matches anchor 4, not 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Gemini AI", "Google AI", and "multimodal tasks" are natural user phrases, but common variations like "Gemini CLI" or "gemini command" are missing, and "needing advanced AI capabilities" is generic filler that adds no trigger value. Falls between anchors 3 and 4; missing synonyms and the vague fourth trigger pull it to 3.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Gemini CLI integration niche is distinct with tool-specific triggers, carrying only minor overlap risk from the broader "Google AI" and "advanced AI capabilities" phrases. Matches anchor 4 — mostly distinct with minor overlap risk — rather than 3, since the core triggers would not fire for unrelated skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (668 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz

Path

skills/gemini-cli/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.