CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

stitch-sdk-bug-bash

Find bugs in the Stitch SDK using a real API key. Covers standard functional edges and tricky situations.

Quality

73%

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 ./.agents/skills/stitch-sdk-bug-bash/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 delivers concrete, executable bug-hunting guidance: specific SDK probes with expected behaviors, a tricky-situations matrix, a diagnostic protocol, and a nearly complete runnable TypeScript template. Its main weaknesses are the unresolved cleanup step in the template, minor motivational padding, and an inline code template that might be better placed in a reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and mostly earned — specific API probes ("stitch.project('invalid-id')", "project.generate('')"), a tight scenario table, and a runnable template — with only minor trimmable padding such as the motivational "do not just verify that the SDK works. Try to break it!" framing. This fits 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'; a 5 would require every section to be pure instruction like the lean code-block anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

The full TypeScript "Bug Bash" template is nearly copy-paste ready and names concrete SDK calls with expected outcomes ("project.generate('')" → safe rejection, "ds.apply({ selectedScreenIds: [] })" → clean handling). It falls short of 5 because the cleanup step is left as a commented assumption ("// Assuming we have a deleteProject binding or we just leave it"), leaving one executable gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The template sequences the end-to-end flow (create project → probe empty prompt → create DS → list screens → apply to empty list → cleanup) and the "Diagnostic Hygiene" section supplies validation checkpoints (try/catch, inspect error.code, classify raw TypeError as a high-priority bug). Minor validation gaps remain — cleanup is unverified and resource disposal is unresolved — which matches 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present' rather than the fully validated 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single-file skill (~125 lines) has no bundle files, and content is well-organized into mindset, surface areas, a scenario matrix, diagnostics, and a template. The ~55-line inline test template is content that could arguably live in a references/ file, keeping this at 'good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps' rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 a clear, distinctive purpose tied to a specific SDK, but it is under-specified: only one concrete action is stated, trigger terms are thin, and there is no 'Use when...' guidance for when to invoke the skill. Adding a trigger clause and natural synonyms (e.g., "test", "edge cases") would lift both completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks to find bugs in, test, or stress-test the Stitch SDK, or mentions Stitch SDK edge cases."

Include natural trigger-term variations users would actually say ("test the SDK", "edge cases", "SDK bug hunt", "stress test") alongside the current "functional edges and tricky situations" phrasing.

List 2-3 more concrete capabilities (e.g., probing stale handles, empty-prompt generation, empty-list design-system application) to raise specificity from a single action to a comprehensive summary.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Find bugs in the Stitch SDK using a real API key" names the domain and one concrete action, but the rest ("Covers standard functional edges and tricky situations") is generic and adds no further concrete capabilities. It matches the anchor 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; a 4 would require several specific listed actions, which this lacks.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (find bugs in the Stitch SDK using a real API key), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent trigger guidance, capping completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It sits at the anchor 'has a clear what but when is missing or only weakly implied'.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Find bugs", "Stitch SDK", and "API key" are relevant keywords, but natural user phrases like "test the SDK", "edge cases", or "QA the SDK" are absent, and "standard functional edges and tricky situations" are not phrases a user would naturally say. This fits 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is tied to a specific, named SDK ("Stitch SDK") with a specific purpose (bug finding with a real API key), forming a clear niche with minimal overlap risk against generic testing or SDK skills. It matches 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk'.

5 / 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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

google-labs-code/stitch-sdk

Path

.agents/skills/stitch-sdk-bug-bash/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.