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

62%

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 ./.claude/skills/gemini-cli/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is gemini-cli in fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz

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 skill is highly actionable — almost entirely copy-paste-ready commands with specific flags and safety guidance — but it is a padded, monolithic 660-line document that duplicates its YOLO-safety material across three sections and inlines reference material (settings schema, env vars, interactive commands, troubleshooting) that belongs in separate files. Its own Examples section also undermines its safety guidance by recommending giant unvalidated YOLO runs.

Suggestions

Move the settings.json reference, environment variables, interactive command catalog, and troubleshooting into separate reference files (e.g., references/configuration.md, references/troubleshooting.md), keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview with one-line pointers.

Consolidate the three overlapping YOLO-safety sections ("YOLO Mode - Use with Caution", "Safe Automation with Dry-Run", "Better Alternative: Iterative Workflows") into one, and rewrite the Examples section to follow the skill's own iterative review-then-verify pattern instead of giant single-shot --yolo tasks with no validation.

Fix the JSON output inconsistency ("--output-format json" vs "--json") and verify or remove unverifiable subcommands (gemini tools list/describe, gemini checkpoint list/restore, --dry-run).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~660-line body is noticeably verbose with several padded/redundant sections: YOLO safety guidance is repeated in "YOLO Mode - Use with Caution", "Safe Automation with Dry-Run", and "Better Alternative: Iterative Workflows"; the "Examples" section re-illustrates the exact patterns already shown; and a "Related Skills" list plus "Updates" section add little. This matches the 2-anchor (several unnecessary padded sections) rather than 3 (only some unnecessary explanation).

2 / 5

Actionability

Nearly every section gives concrete, copy-paste-ready bash commands with specific flags (--yolo, --include-directories, --output-format json, --checkpointing) covering install, auth, and common workflows. It falls short of 5 due to minor gaps/inconsistencies: JSON output is specified as "--output-format json" in one section and "--json" in another, and several subcommands (gemini tools list/describe, gemini checkpoint list/restore, --dry-run) are presented without any indication they were verified.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Think-Act-Observe loop and sequential task decomposition sections present clear sequences with review/verify checkpoints, but the "Examples" section (giant single-shot --yolo runs that "Commit and push changes", update dependencies, and auto-apply security patches with no validation step) directly contradicts the earlier "NEVER Use YOLO For" guidance. Per the rubric's cap, batch/destructive workflows without validation cap workflow clarity at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body has well-organized section headers, but everything is inlined in one ~660-line file with no bundle references at all: the settings.json schema, environment variable list, interactive command catalog, troubleshooting, and extended examples are all content that clearly belongs in separate reference files. This matches the 3-anchor (some structure but content that should be separate is inline) rather than 2, since the section structure itself is good.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 correctly answers both what and when with a clear 'Use when...' clause and domain-specific triggers, but it is held back by generic capability phrases ("AI collaboration", "advanced AI capabilities") and missing natural trigger variations like "Gemini CLI" or "gemini-cli". It is serviceable but noticeably above the bad examples yet below the polished good examples.

Suggestions

Replace the vague trigger "or needing advanced AI capabilities" with concrete triggers such as "or when the user mentions the Gemini CLI, gemini-cli, or Google Gemini models".

Make the capability list more concrete and specific, e.g. "Run Gemini CLI prompts from Claude Code, pass files via @-references, parse JSON output, and manage YOLO/checkpointing for safe automation" instead of "AI collaboration, code analysis, and tool execution".

Trim the generic phrase "AI collaboration" which both weakens specificity and raises conflict risk with other AI-integration skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("Integrate Gemini AI CLI into Claude Code") and a couple of actions ("code analysis, and tool execution"), but "AI collaboration" is generic and coverage is not comprehensive, matching the 3-anchor (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions) rather than the 4-anchor (several specific actions).

3 / 5

Completeness

Both what ("Integrate Gemini AI CLI into Claude Code for AI collaboration, code analysis, and tool execution") and when ("Use when working with Gemini AI, Google AI, multimodal tasks...") are explicitly present. It fits the 4-anchor because the when-clause includes the vague trigger "or needing advanced AI capabilities" rather than fully concrete trigger phrases, so it is not a 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant natural keywords ("Gemini AI", "Google AI", "multimodal tasks") but misses common variations users would say ("Gemini CLI", "gemini-cli", "Google Gemini"), and "needing advanced AI capabilities" is vague filler, leaving it at the 3-anchor (some relevant keywords, missing common variations) rather than 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Gemini/Google AI niche is fairly distinct, but the broad phrases "AI collaboration", "tool execution", and "needing advanced AI capabilities" could overlap with other AI-integration or code-analysis skills, matching the 3-anchor (somewhat specific but could still overlap).

3 / 5

Total

13

/

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

.claude/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.