interface-design

This skill is for interface design — dashboards, admin panels, apps, tools, and interactive products. NOT for marketing design (landing pages, marketing sites, campaigns).

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./runtime/harnesses/src/embedded-skills/interface-design/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

73%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 is a well-structured, actionable craft guide with an explicit workflow, validation checkpoints, and clean one-level references. Its main weakness is verbosity from motivational/philosophical sections that could be trimmed, and some overlap between inline design principles and the principles.md reference.

Suggestions

Trim the motivational prose sections ("The Problem", "Where Defaults Hide", "Sameness Is Failure") to their actionable essence to improve token efficiency.

Move the detailed Design Principles material (Token Architecture, Spacing, Padding, Depth, Border Radius) that overlaps principles.md into the reference, keeping only a short pointer inline.

Pull one or two concrete code/token examples from principles.md into the main body so the core workflow is fully executable without a reference hop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body delivers specific craft guidance but is noticeably padded with motivational prose ("The Problem", "Where Defaults Hide", "Sameness Is Failure", "Intent Must Be Systemic") that could be tightened without losing meaning; it is mostly efficient but contains several unnecessary explanations.	3 / 5
Actionability	It provides concrete, specific guidance for an instruction-only skill: a mandatory per-component template ("Intent: / Palette: / Depth: ..."), a Suggest+Ask proposal template, quantified required outputs (5+ domain concepts, 5+ colors, 3 defaults), and specific values (1280×800 viewport, 240-320px sidebar, grid-cols-3/4/6); it stops short of a 5 because executable code lives in references rather than the main body.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Workflow section gives an explicit numbered sequence (Explore → Propose → Confirm → Build → Evaluate → Offer to save) with an explicit validation checkpoint ("Evaluate — Run the mandate checks before showing") and a feedback loop ("If any check fails, iterate before showing"), plus a concrete checklist (swap, squint, signature, token tests).	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is split across verified one-level-deep references (principles.md, validation.md, critique.md, example.md) clearly signaled in a Deep Dives section, and the body is well-sectioned; it falls short of a 5 because the body itself is long with design-principle detail that overlaps material also covered in principles.md.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

73%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 well-scoped with a clear niche and effective negative-scope guidance that strongly distinguishes it from marketing/frontend design. Its main weakness is that it states what the skill is for rather than naming concrete actions, and it lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 concrete verbs describing what the skill does (e.g., "Designs and audits dashboards, admin panels, and interactive tools") to lift specificity.

Append an explicit "Use when..." clause naming the natural trigger phrases a user would say (e.g., "Use when building or redesigning dashboards, admin panels, or SaaS tool interfaces").

Include common synonyms/variations users might say (e.g., "internal tools", "data interfaces", "control panels") to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ("interface design") with a concrete list of product types ("dashboards, admin panels, apps, tools, and interactive products") but does not enumerate the actual actions the skill performs (e.g., build, design, audit), so it sits at the anchor that names the domain with only minimal/generic actions rather than comprehensive coverage.	3 / 5
Completeness	It answers both "what" (interface design for the listed product types) and "when" via the explicit "This skill is for..." scope plus a negative-scope "NOT for marketing design" clause, which functions as equivalent trigger guidance; it stops short of a 5 only because a more explicit "Use when..." phrasing with concrete trigger phrases is absent.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces natural terms a user would actually say ("dashboards", "admin panels", "landing pages", "marketing sites", "campaigns") with good coverage, though it omits common variations and file/format synonyms that would push it to a 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The clear niche (interface/interactive products) combined with an explicit exclusion and redirect ("NOT for marketing design (landing pages, marketing sites, campaigns)") gives it distinct triggers with minimal conflict risk against adjacent skills.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: holaboss-ai/holaOS
Path: runtime/harnesses/src/embedded-skills/interface-design/SKILL.md
Commit: 4684714

Reviewed: 12 days 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.