quasi-coder

Expert 10x engineer skill for interpreting and implementing code from shorthand, quasi-code, and natural language descriptions. Use when collaborators provide incomplete code snippets, pseudo-code, or descriptions with potential typos or incorrect terminology. Excels at translating non-technical or semi-technical descriptions into production-quality code.

1.00x

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.00x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/quasi-coder/SKILL.md

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 body is actionable with good code examples but markedly verbose, with redundant sections and no external file decomposition or validation checkpoints in its workflow.

Suggestions

Collapse the duplicated shorthand specification in 'Shorthand Key' and 'Variables and Markers' into one section, and trim the restated description, architect metaphor, and generic 'Best Practices' to cut roughly a third of the body.

Add an explicit validation step to the Interpretation Process (e.g., verify generated code compiles and tests pass, then fix and re-verify before finishing) to satisfy the workflow feedback-loop requirement.

Extract the formal marker/variable specification and the troubleshooting table into a referenced file (e.g. references/SHORTHAND_SPEC.md) so SKILL.md reads as a concise overview with one-level-deep navigation.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The 365-line body is noticeably verbose: it restates the description, leans on an extended architect metaphor, restates the persona five ways in 'Role', and duplicates the shorthand spec verbatim in both 'Shorthand Key' and 'Variables and Markers'; generic 'Best Practices' ('Apply Expert Knowledge', 'Use Proper Tools') restate what Claude already knows.	2 / 5
Actionability	It provides concrete, executable examples (the validateUserInput JS function with regex, the Python list-comprehension translation, marker syntax), but the non-code-action example stays abstract ('Use appropriate tools to fetch data and save file') rather than copy-paste ready.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A sequenced 'Interpretation Process' and a Step 1/2/3 example workflow exist, but there are no explicit validation/verification checkpoints (e.g., verify the generated code compiles/tests pass), which per the rubric caps code-generation workflows at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers provide structure, but the skill is a single monolithic SKILL.md with no bundled reference files and heavy inline duplication (the shorthand specification appears twice); content that should live in separate files is inlined.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

92%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 strong, third-person description that explicitly states both the capability and concrete usage triggers, with a distinctive niche. Minor room for richer synonym/extension trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists multiple concrete actions ('interpreting and implementing code from shorthand, quasi-code, and natural language descriptions', 'translating non-technical or semi-technical descriptions into production-quality code'), matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor.	5 / 5
Completeness	It answers both 'what' (interpreting/implementing code from imperfect descriptions) and 'when' via an explicit 'Use when collaborators provide incomplete code snippets, pseudo-code, or descriptions with potential typos' clause, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces natural phrases collaborators would say ('incomplete code snippets', 'pseudo-code', 'descriptions with potential typos', 'non-technical or semi-technical descriptions'), but lacks synonyms and the file-marker shorthand ('start-shorthand') as a trigger, so it falls just below the comprehensive anchor.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is clearly delimited (shorthand/quasi-code interpretation with bounded markers) and unlikely to fire for unrelated coding skills, giving minimal conflict risk.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 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: github/awesome-copilot
Path: skills/quasi-coder/SKILL.md
Commit: 406c31f

Reviewed: about 16 hours 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.