CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

x402-erc7710

Design and implement demos combining x402 HTTP payments with ERC-7710 smart contract delegations and ERC-7715 wallet permission requests for subscriptions, bounded agent budgets, recurring spend, pay-per-use APIs, and agentic commerce.

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

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./integrations/x402-erc7710/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The content is highly actionable with concrete types, addresses, thresholds, and validation rules, and its workflows are clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are conciseness and progressive disclosure: a long inline body with overlapping sections that could be trimmed or offloaded to references.

Suggestions

Move secondary material such as 'Other Demo Ideas', 'Signed Evidence Pattern', and 'Periodic GenLayer Control' into references and link to them from a concise overview, reducing the inline body length.

Consolidate the overlapping mode sections (Discovery, Trust Objection, Adjudicated Setup, Conversational Operator) to remove redundancy and tighten token use.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely domain-specific and assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept filler) but at 222 lines it includes overlapping mode sections and content such as 'Other Demo Ideas' and 'Signed Evidence Pattern' that could be tightened or moved to references, fitting the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides a concrete TypeScript AgentSpendPolicy type, exact contract addresses, specific thresholds (0.05 USDC, 5 USDC/week), and explicit validation rules (tx hash = 0x + 64 hex), giving copy-ready specific guidance appropriate for this protocol-design skill.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Multiple clearly sequenced workflows (Discovery-First, Adjudicated Setup, 10-step Subscription execution flow) with explicit validation checkpoints (receipt-proof validation, 'Reject evidence before review unless...') and a 10-item implementation checklist match the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps' anchor.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A real one-level reference (references/demo-blueprints.md) is clearly signaled at the end, but the main body is a dense monolith with inline content (Other Demo Ideas, Signed Evidence Pattern, Periodic GenLayer Control) that could be split out, fitting the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%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 is specific and distinct within its protocol niche, but it omits an explicit use-trigger and leans on technical identifiers over the natural terms a user would actually say. It scores well on what it does but is capped on completeness by the missing 'when' guidance.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when building demos where an agent pays for HTTP resources through x402 under a bounded delegated permission'.

Surface more natural user phrasings (e.g., 'agent paying for paid APIs', 'subscription demos', 'capped agent spending') alongside the ERC-7710/ERC-7715 identifiers to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates multiple concrete actions ("Design and implement demos combining x402 HTTP payments with ERC-7710 smart contract delegations and ERC-7715 wallet permission requests") plus several named use cases, matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers what the skill does but provides no explicit 'when to use it' trigger clause; per the judging guidelines a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some natural terms ("subscriptions", "recurring spend", "pay-per-use APIs", "agentic commerce") but leans on jargon-heavy identifiers (ERC-7710, ERC-7715) and lacks the common phrasings a user would naturally say, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The specific intersection of x402 with ERC-7710/ERC-7715 delegated payments is a clear niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
internet-court/internet-court-skill
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.