CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

notion

Notion API for creating and managing pages, databases, and blocks.

56

Quality

66%

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 ./.trae/openclaw-skills/notion/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

76%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.

A strong, execution-first API skill: every recipe is runnable as written and the version-specific data-source/database distinctions are captured in a dedicated, high-value section. Its main gaps are the total absence of validation/verification feedback for write operations (which caps workflow clarity) and a description/frontmatter trigger clause, plus minor token trims in the repeated curl headers.

Suggestions

Add verification guidance for write operations, e.g. after creating/updating a page, fetch it with GET /v1/pages/{page_id} to confirm the change landed, and check the HTTP status / error 'object' in responses before proceeding.

Extract the Property Types reference and possibly the rarer operations (create data source) into a references/ file, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links.

State the authorization failure mode (401/403 when a page hasn't been shared with the integration) and its fix, since sharing is the most common setup pitfall and currently only appears as a setup step with no error-recovery loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely lean — curl recipes with minimal prose and a 'Key Differences' section that conveys exactly the non-obvious, version-specific knowledge. It is not a 5 because of small trims available, e.g. 'This skill uses 2025-09-03 (latest)' and repeating the full three-header block verbatim in every example where the setup already establishes it. It is clearly above level 3, which calls for unnecessary explanation of things Claude already knows.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every operation is a complete, copy-paste-ready curl command with real headers, endpoints, and JSON payloads (search, get page, get blocks, create page, query, create data source, update, append blocks), plus a concrete property-type cheat sheet. This matches the level-5 anchor: fully executable commands covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Setup is a clear numbered sequence and each operation is unambiguous, but there are no validation or verification steps for the write operations (creating pages, updating properties, appending blocks) and no error-recovery guidance. Per the rubric's cap — missing validation in workflows involving database/data-source operations, which the scoring notes explicitly list — workflow clarity cannot exceed 3. It is not level 2 because the sequences present are well defined and concrete, not gappy.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the body is well organized into clearly headed sections (Setup, API Basics, Common Operations, Property Types, Key Differences, Notes) with each block easy to locate. It is not level 5 because at ~150 lines the Property Types list and the full operation catalogue could arguably live in a separate reference file, and no references/navigation to split content are provided; it is not level 3 because nothing that clearly belongs elsewhere is inlined and no references are buried.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 short, product-specific, and conflict-free, but it is a bare capability label: it states only a partial 'what' (creating/managing) with no 'when to use it' guidance and no trigger synonyms beyond the product name. Adding an explicit 'Use when...' clause and more concrete verbs (query, update, search) would raise it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions Notion, wants to create or update Notion pages/databases, or needs to query or edit Notion content programmatically.'

Replace the generic 'managing' with the concrete operations actually covered in the body: creating, reading, updating, and querying pages, data sources, and blocks.

Include natural user phrasings/synonyms such as 'Notion page', 'Notion database', 'add to Notion', or 'Notion workspace' to strengthen trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Notion API') and target objects ('pages, databases, and blocks') but only one truly concrete action ('creating') alongside the generic 'managing'. It matches the level-3 anchor (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive) rather than level 4, which requires several specific actions like 'query', 'update', or 'search'.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear ('creating and managing pages, databases, and blocks') but there is no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger clause, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not level 4 or 5 because 'when' is entirely absent rather than merely weakly explicit.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Notion', 'pages', 'databases', and 'blocks' are relevant keywords a user might say, but the description misses common variations users actually use such as 'Notion page', 'wiki', 'Notion database', or 'add to Notion'. It sits at the level-3 anchor (some relevant keywords, missing common variations or synonyms) rather than level 4's fuller keyword coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Notion API' names a specific product, giving this a clear niche with distinct triggers; a user mentioning Notion pages or databases would naturally land here with minimal conflict risk. It clearly fits the level-5 anchor rather than level 4's 'minor overlap risk with closely related skills'.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
huangruiteng/CS-Notes
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.