CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

write-flutter

Write, review, or refactor idiomatic Flutter code. Use for widgets, state and architecture, lifecycle, layout, theming, accessibility, performance, and tests. Apply alongside the write-dart skill for Dart guidance.

Quality

81%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 well-structured, competent skill body that delegates detail to six clearly labeled reference files and provides concrete, API-level Flutter rules with a validation section. The main gaps are minor rationale padding and the absence of inline runnable code examples or an explicit fix-retry loop.

Suggestions

Add one or two short inline copy-paste code snippets for the highest-frequency rules (e.g., a const widget extraction and a mounted-check pattern) to raise actionability.

Tighten justifying rationale sentences like "The build method can run every frame" and "Reusing the same widget instance lets Flutter stop the update traversal" where the rule already implies the reason.

Frame the Validate section as an explicit feedback loop (run, observe console warnings, fix, re-run) to push workflow clarity toward the top anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept explaining), and most rationale clauses justify non-obvious rules, but a few explanatory sentences like "The build method can run every frame" could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Highly concrete guidance naming specific APIs, lints, and pixel sizes (e.g., "check mounted", "use_build_context_synchronously lint", "48 by 48 logical pixels"), but the body has no inline copy-paste code block since examples are delegated to references.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear apply-order (match project, core defaults, then validate) with an explicit Validate checkpoint listing overflow/exception/dispose signals, but it lacks an explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A concise overview body with six well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files (widgets, state-and-architecture, layout, design, performance, testing), each annotated with its scope, giving easy navigation.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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.

A focused, third-person description that states concrete actions and an explicit "Use for" trigger covering eight Flutter sub-domains. It is strong on completeness and distinctiveness but stops short of the top anchor because its actions are generic verbs and its trigger phrasing omits synonyms and user-mention formulations.

Suggestions

Replace or supplement the generic verbs with more distinct concrete operations (e.g., "compose widgets, manage state, wire lifecycles, theme the UI") to lift specificity toward the top anchor.

Add natural user-mention trigger phrasing (e.g., "Use when the user asks about Flutter widgets, layout, theming, or widget tests") to push completeness to the top anchor.

Include common synonyms or extensions ("Flutter/Dart UI, .dart files, Material/Cupertino") to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names three concrete actions ("Write, review, or refactor idiomatic Flutter code") plus a comprehensive list of eight sub-domains, but the actions are high-level verbs rather than multiple distinct concrete operations, leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers "what" (write/review/refactor Flutter code) and gives an explicit "Use for" when-clause with concrete topics, but the when is phrased as a topic list rather than natural user-mention trigger phrases.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage via "Use for widgets, state and architecture, lifecycle, layout, theming, accessibility, performance, and tests," but missing common synonyms and file-type/extension variants users might say.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"idiomatic Flutter code" carves a clear niche, but the explicit coordination with the companion write-dart skill creates minor overlap risk with a closely related skill.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

flutter/website

Path

.agents/skills/write-flutter/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.