CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

fix-members-short-description

Use when asked to fix short descriptions of Python type members.

59

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/fix-members-short-description/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 content is well-organized, concise, and provides concrete examples plus specific rules for the transformation. Its main weakness is the absence of any validation or verification step despite being a batch operation across all members, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification step after the transformation (e.g., re-render the docs, run a linter, or confirm each modified docstring's first sentence still parses) to satisfy the batch-operation validation expectation.

Include a short example demonstrating the '# noqa: E501' fallback on an unbreakable long token so the edge case is shown, not just described.

Break the transformation into a brief numbered sequence (locate members -> read first sentence -> apply backslash wrap -> enforce 88-char limit) to make the implicit workflow explicit.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient and the Flet docstring-generation context is genuinely necessary rather than padding Claude already knows; only minor phrasing could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete before/after code examples, an explicit backslash-concatenation rule, an 88-character limit, and a specific '# noqa: E501' fallback give mostly executable guidance, though no noqa example is shown.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The instruction 'go through all members of all types' is a batch operation with no validation or verification step, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the rubric's batch-operation guideline.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, organized into clear 'Inputs' and 'Instructions' sections, and is self-contained with no need for external references, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

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 is clear, specific, and uses an explicit 'Use when' trigger that jointly conveys what and when. It is held back by limited keyword coverage (no synonyms like 'docstrings') and a single concrete action rather than comprehensive capabilities.

Suggestions

Add natural synonyms and trigger variations (e.g., 'docstrings', 'member summaries') so users who phrase the request differently still match.

List the concrete actions performed (e.g., 'wrap first sentences with backslash concatenation, enforce an 88-character line limit') to lift specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Consider mentioning the Flet/docstring-generation context in the description to sharpen distinctiveness from general Python docstring skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The phrase 'fix short descriptions of Python type members' names a specific domain and one concrete action, but offers only a single action rather than comprehensive coverage.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both the what ('fix short descriptions of Python type members') and the when ('Use when asked to fix...') are present and explicit, but the trigger phrases could be more comprehensive with synonyms.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The natural trigger 'Use when asked to fix short descriptions of Python type members' reads naturally, but keyword coverage is limited and misses common synonyms such as 'docstrings'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche of fixing Python type-member short descriptions is clear and mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against general Python docstring or documentation skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
flet-dev/flet
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.