CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

add-lto

Enable Link-Time Optimization (LTO and ThinLTO) for an LLVM 22-based compiler. Covers full LTO vs ThinLTO trade-offs, bitcode emission from a frontend, LLD integration, out-of-tree whole-program optimization via ModulePassManager, and common debugging tips.

Quality

79%

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-lto/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 content is a well-structured, largely executable guide with clear dual-workflow sequencing and useful debugging/mistake references. Its weaknesses are a stubbed Step B3, validation placed outside the workflow flow, and see-also links to non-existent external files.

Suggestions

Inline the verifyModule check into Step B1/B2 as an explicit 'validate before optimizing' checkpoint rather than relegating it to Common mistakes.

Replace the Step B3 comment stub with a minimal executable TargetMachine emission snippet, or move the detail into a real local bundle file.

Fix the 'See also' links to point to files that exist within the skill bundle (e.g. ./references/out-of-tree.md) instead of ../../docs/* paths that are absent.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes LLVM competence (no explaining what LLVM/translation units/inlining are), but has minor restatements such as the 'Rules' bullets reiterating the same-flag requirement that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Most sections provide copy-paste-ready C++, bash, and CMake (bitcode emission, clang/LLD invocations, PassBuilder pipeline, llvm-dis/llvm-readobj), but Step B3 is a comment stub pointing to an external out-of-tree.md doc rather than executable code.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Two clearly sequenced workflows (Model A: A1–A3, Model B: B1–B3) with a comparison table, but the verifyModule validation checkpoint lives in 'Common mistakes' rather than being embedded in the B1→B2 flow as an explicit gate.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized with a one-level-deep 'See also' block, but no bundle files exist and the referenced targets (../../docs/out-of-tree.md, ../../docs/new-pass-manager.md) are external and not present on disk.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 is specific and distinctive, clearly stating what the skill does for an LLVM 22-based compiler. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 3.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when enabling cross-module optimization (inlining, devirtualization, dead-code elimination) across separately compiled translation units in an LLVM 22 compiler.'

Include common file extensions such as '.bc' alongside 'bitcode' to broaden natural trigger coverage.

Consider mentioning 'whole-program' or 'cross-module' optimization explicitly in the description so users searching by outcome (not just 'LTO') surface this skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'bitcode emission from a frontend', 'LLD integration', 'out-of-tree whole-program optimization via ModulePassManager', and 'debugging tips' — giving comprehensive coverage of the LTO domain.

5 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clearly stated, but the description lacks a 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keywords with synonyms ('Link-Time Optimization', 'LTO', 'ThinLTO', 'full LTO', 'LLD', 'bitcode'), but no file extensions (e.g. '.bc') that a user might mention, leaving a few natural terms missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A narrow LLVM-22 LTO/ThinLTO niche with distinct, technical triggers and minimal overlap with other skills, so conflict risk is low.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

hbarve1/tessl-llvm

Path

tiles/tessl-llvm/skills/add-lto/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.