supabase-troubleshooting

Troubleshoot common Supabase issues including auth errors, RLS policies, connection problems, and performance. Use when debugging Supabase issues, fixing errors, or optimizing performance.

Quality

81%

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

Quality

Content

76%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 a dense, highly actionable troubleshooting reference with concrete code for every common Supabase problem and a useful diagnosis table. Its weaknesses are the absence of explicit verify-the-fix validation checkpoints in the diagnostic flow and heavy inlining of per-domain content that could be split into more reference files.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification step to the diagnostic flow (e.g., after applying a fix, re-run the failing query / re-check auth.getUser() to confirm the issue is resolved before considering it closed).

Split the larger inlined sections (Authentication, RLS, Database, Realtime) into per-domain reference files under references/, keeping SKILL.md as a concise diagnosis-and-pointer overview to reduce token load.

Trim redundancy between the inline error-code tables and references/common-errors.md so each error lives in one canonical place.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and mostly code/tables with minimal prose padding — it does not explain what Supabase or basic concepts are. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because the SKILL.md inlines a large volume of per-issue code (~450 lines) and a few inline comments are slightly redundant with the dedicated common-errors.md reference.	4 / 5
Actionability	Every section provides copy-paste-ready JavaScript, SQL, or bash snippets plus a symptom→cause diagnosis table and error-code tables with solutions, covering the common Supabase cases. Placeholder values like 'your_table' are appropriate for a reference, fitting anchor 5's fully executable, common-case coverage.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 'Quick Diagnosis' table gives a rough symptom→cause flow and each section offers a fix, but there is no explicit sequenced process and, critically, no 'verify the fix resolved the issue' checkpoint. Per the destructive/batch-fix cap, a troubleshooting skill that applies fixes (CREATE POLICY, upserts) without validation steps cannot score above 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Structure is good with clear section headers and a clearly signaled, one-level-deep References link to the real references/common-errors.md file. It is below anchor 5 because substantial per-domain code (auth, RLS, database, realtime) is inlined in SKILL.md rather than split into additional reference files, leaving minor organization gaps.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

87%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 well-constructed: third person, explicit what-and-when structure, and a distinct Supabase niche with concrete issue categories and natural trigger phrases. Its only weakness is slightly generic action wording ('troubleshoot') and a few missing natural synonyms.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Troubleshoot common Supabase issues including auth errors, RLS policies, connection problems, and performance" names the domain plus four concrete capability areas, listing several specific targets with only minor coverage gaps. It sits above anchor 3 (1-2 actions) because it enumerates four distinct issue categories, but below anchor 5 since the single verb 'troubleshoot' is generic rather than a comprehensive set of distinct actions.	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both 'what' ("Troubleshoot common Supabase issues including auth errors, RLS policies, connection problems, and performance") and 'when' ("Use when debugging Supabase issues, fixing errors, or optimizing performance") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor 5 example.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Supabase issues, auth errors, RLS policies, connection problems, debugging Supabase issues, fixing errors, optimizing performance" are natural phrases users would actually say. Coverage is good but a few natural synonyms are missing (e.g., Postgres, Edge Functions, Realtime, Storage), so it does not reach anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Supabase" is a clear, specific niche with distinct triggers (auth errors, RLS, connection, performance) and minimal overlap risk with other skills. It does not read as generic and would not trigger for unrelated skills.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz
Path: skills/supabase-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.