CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

review-check-architecture

Use when checking if code follows ARCHITECTURE.md patterns - runs automated conformance checks.

Quality

78%

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 ./packs/vue/skills/review-check-architecture/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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 strong, lean skill body: executable grep/find commands covering 14 concrete architecture checks with a defined output format and no wasted tokens. The only weaknesses are interpretive gaps — inconsistent pass/fail signaling between the script and the summary table, and unspecified behavior when a module argument narrows the scope.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is pure payload — one 14-check bash block plus a three-line output spec ('Produce a summary table ... Overall score: X/14 checks passing.') — with zero conceptual explanation and nothing to trim; it fully assumes Claude's competence.

5 / 5

Actionability

The bash block is copy-paste ready and covers 14 concrete executable checks, but pass/fail semantics are inconsistent: check 1's header ('Services with try/catch') contradicts the table row ('Services without try/catch'), checks 9 and 12 emit bare 'wc -l' counts, and check 10 ends in '|| true' with no pass signal — minor gaps leaving Claude to infer how to fill the PASS/FAIL column.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is clear (scope via $ARGUMENTS → run all checks → summary table → X/14 score) and the skill is read-only so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply, but per-module scoping is undefined ('Scope: $ARGUMENTS' yet every command is hardcoded to src/modules/*) and Occurrences semantics for the count-only checks are left implicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single cohesive, well-sectioned script ('## Automated Checks' plus output format) with no bundle files; everything is needed on every invocation so inline placement is appropriate, and nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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 has an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause and a distinctive niche anchored by the ARCHITECTURE.md artifact, but the 'what' is one generic action ('runs automated conformance checks') with a narrow trigger vocabulary. It sits well above vague examples like 'Helps with documents' yet below the multi-action, synonym-rich good examples.

Suggestions

Enumerate what the conformance checks cover (e.g., 'checks services, Vue components, Pinia stores, cross-module imports, and TypeScript usage against docs/ARCHITECTURE.md') to make the 'what' concrete and comprehensive.

Add natural trigger synonyms such as 'architecture review', 'architecture compliance', or 'module boundaries' so users phrasing the need differently still match.

State the output the skill produces (e.g., 'reports a pass/fail summary table across 14 automated checks') to sharpen the capability description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('checking if code follows ARCHITECTURE.md patterns') and a single action ('runs automated conformance checks'), but does not list what the checks actually cover (services, components, stores, imports, types) — matching '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' rather than level 4's 'several specific actions'.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and concrete ('Use when checking if code follows ARCHITECTURE.md patterns') and the 'what' is present ('runs automated conformance checks'), but the 'what' is a single generic action rather than the comprehensive, concrete action list required for level 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'ARCHITECTURE.md' and 'conformance checks' are terms a user might naturally say, but coverage is narrow: common variations like 'architecture review', 'architecture compliance', or 'module boundaries' are absent, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'ARCHITECTURE.md patterns' carves a clear, mostly distinct niche, but 'checking if code follows patterns' loosely overlaps general code-review or design-pattern requests, leaving minor overlap risk with closely related skills rather than level 5's minimal risk.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

fernandezbaptiste/specialist-agent

Path

packs/vue/skills/review-check-architecture/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.