recipe-compare-sheet-tabs

Read data from two tabs in a Google Sheet to compare and identify differences.

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/recipe-compare-sheet-tabs/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

32%

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 communicates a basic understanding of the skill's purpose—comparing data across two Google Sheet tabs—but lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), comprehensive action details, and natural keyword variations. It would benefit from more specificity about what kinds of comparisons are performed and clear trigger terms to help Claude select it appropriately.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to compare two tabs in a Google Sheet, find mismatches, or identify differences between spreadsheet tabs.'

Include natural keyword variations such as 'spreadsheet', 'worksheet', 'diff', 'discrepancies', 'mismatches', and 'Google Sheets' (plural).

List more specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Reads data from two tabs in a Google Sheet, compares rows or columns, highlights mismatches, and reports added, removed, or changed entries.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (Google Sheets) and some actions (read data, compare, identify differences), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like highlighting mismatches, generating diff reports, or specifying what kinds of differences it detects.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (read and compare data from two tabs) but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also somewhat thin, placing this at 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes 'Google Sheet' and 'tabs' which are natural terms, but misses common variations like 'spreadsheet', 'worksheet', 'compare columns', 'diff', 'discrepancies', or file extensions like '.gsheet'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of 'Google Sheet' and 'two tabs' and 'compare differences' is somewhat specific, but could overlap with general spreadsheet analysis or data comparison skills that aren't tab-specific.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

60%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill is concise and well-structured but critically incomplete. Steps 1 and 2 are actionable with concrete commands, but step 3—the core purpose of the skill (comparing data)—is left entirely vague with no guidance on comparison logic, output format, or handling of edge cases like mismatched rows or columns.

Suggestions

Expand step 3 with concrete guidance on how to compare the data—e.g., provide a code snippet or structured approach for identifying added/removed/changed rows, and specify the expected output format.

Add an example showing what the comparison output should look like (e.g., a table of differences with row references, old values, and new values).

Include guidance on edge cases such as tabs with different row counts, different column structures, or empty cells.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is lean and efficient. No unnecessary explanations of what Google Sheets are or how comparisons work. Every line serves a purpose.	3 / 3
Actionability	Steps 1 and 2 provide concrete, executable commands with clear syntax, but step 3 ('Compare the data and identify changes') is vague and lacks any concrete guidance on how to perform the comparison or what output to produce.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow is a simple 3-step sequence but step 3 is entirely undefined—no comparison method, no expected output format, no validation of results. For a comparison task, there should be guidance on what constitutes a 'difference' and how to present findings.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a simple skill under 50 lines, the structure is appropriate. It clearly references a prerequisite skill (`gws-sheets`) and keeps content at one level with no unnecessary nesting.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: googleworkspace/cli
Commit: a3768d0

Reviewed: about 1 month 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.