CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

add-debug-info

Add DWARF debug info to an existing LLVM 22 IR frontend. Covers DIBuilder setup, compile unit, function subprograms, local variable declarations, source locations on instructions, and module flags.

62

Quality

72%

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 ./tiles/tessl-llvm/skills/add-debug-info/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%Scale 1-3

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

This is a strong, highly actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and concrete, executable code examples covering the full DWARF debug info integration process. Its main weakness is length — it could benefit from splitting detailed sections into referenced files — and minor verbosity in explanatory text. The common mistakes section is a valuable addition that prevents real pitfalls.

Suggestions

Consider splitting debug type creation (Step 2) and common mistakes into separate referenced files to improve progressive disclosure and reduce the main file's token footprint.

Remove explanatory phrases Claude already knows (e.g., 'No extra CMake components needed', 'The most impactful step for debugger stepping') to tighten conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is mostly efficient with good code examples, but includes some unnecessary commentary (e.g., 'The most impactful step for debugger stepping') and the prerequisites section explains things Claude would already know (e.g., 'LLVM must be built with debug info support (default in all standard installs)'). Some inline comments are helpful but others are redundant.

2 / 3

Actionability

Every step provides fully executable C++ code with concrete function signatures, specific LLVM API calls, and exact parameters. The bash commands for verification are copy-paste ready. The code examples are complete and realistic, not pseudocode.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 10-step workflow is clearly sequenced from initialization through finalization and verification. It includes explicit validation checkpoints (Step 7 with verifyModule, Step 8 with llvm-dwarfdump --verify), a 'Common mistakes' section serving as a checklist, and clear ordering constraints (e.g., 'before emitting any IR', 'after all functions are emitted').

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is well-structured with clear section headers and logical progression, but it's a long monolithic document (~180 lines of substantive content). The debug types section, common mistakes, and verification steps could be split into referenced files. No external references are provided for advanced topics like struct/array/pointer types.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

67%Scale 1-3

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 excels at specificity and distinctiveness, listing concrete DWARF/LLVM debug info tasks that clearly carve out a unique niche. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness, and the trigger terms are heavily technical jargon that may not match how users naturally phrase their requests.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when adding debugging support, debug symbols, or DWARF info to an LLVM-based compiler or language frontend.'

Include more natural trigger term variations such as 'debugging symbols', 'debugger support', 'source-level debugging', 'compiler debug output', or '.ll files' to improve discoverability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: DIBuilder setup, compile unit creation, function subprograms, local variable declarations, source locations on instructions, and module flags. These are all distinct, concrete tasks.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what does this do' with specific capabilities, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The when is only implied by the nature of the tasks described.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant technical terms like 'DWARF', 'debug info', 'LLVM 22', 'IR frontend', 'DIBuilder', but these are highly specialized jargon. Missing more natural user phrasings like 'debugging symbols', 'debug information', 'debugger support', or file extensions. Users might say 'add debug info to my compiler' rather than these exact terms.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly specific niche: DWARF debug info for LLVM 22 IR frontends. This is unlikely to conflict with any other skill given the very targeted domain and version specificity.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
hbarve1/tessl-llvm
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.