algodocs-automation
Automate Algodocs tasks via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:haniakrim21/everything-claude-code --skill algodocs-automation56
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
7%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is severely underdeveloped. It fails to explain what Algodocs actually does, what specific tasks can be automated, or when Claude should use this skill. The technical jargon (Rube MCP, Composio) is meaningless to users and the lack of concrete actions makes it nearly impossible for Claude to appropriately select this skill.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions that Algodocs can perform (e.g., 'Extract data from invoices, parse receipts, process document templates').
Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when the user mentions Algodocs, document automation, invoice extraction, or OCR processing').
Remove or minimize technical implementation details (Rube MCP, Composio) and focus on user-facing capabilities and use cases.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'Automate Algodocs tasks' without specifying what concrete actions are possible. No specific capabilities like 'extract data', 'process invoices', or 'parse documents' are mentioned. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is extremely vague ('Automate Algodocs tasks') and there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent guidance for when Claude should select this skill. The instruction to 'search tools first' is operational guidance, not trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains technical jargon ('Rube MCP', 'Composio') that users would not naturally say. 'Algodocs' is the only potentially useful trigger term, but lacks common variations or natural language alternatives. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Algodocs' is a specific product name which provides some distinctiveness, but the generic 'automate tasks' phrasing could overlap with other automation skills. The mention of specific tools (Rube MCP, Composio) adds some distinction. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill that efficiently guides Claude through Algodocs automation via Rube MCP. The workflow is clear with appropriate validation checkpoints, and the content respects token budget. The main weakness is that tool call examples use placeholder syntax rather than fully concrete examples, which slightly reduces immediate actionability.
Suggestions
Replace placeholder comments like '/* schema-compliant args from search results */' with a concrete example showing actual Algodocs-specific arguments (e.g., document extraction or extractor listing)
Add one complete end-to-end example showing a real Algodocs task from search through execution with actual response handling
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, avoiding explanations of what Algodocs or Composio are. Every section provides actionable information without padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete tool call patterns with parameter examples, but uses pseudocode-style blocks rather than fully executable code. The argument placeholders like '/* schema-compliant args from search results */' reduce copy-paste readiness. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 3-step workflow with explicit sequencing (discover → check connection → execute). Includes validation checkpoint (verify ACTIVE status before executing) and the Known Pitfalls section provides error recovery guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections progressing from prerequisites to setup to workflow to pitfalls. External reference to toolkit docs is one level deep and clearly signaled. Quick reference table aids navigation. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%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 |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.