CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

spec-miner

Reverse-engineering specialist that extracts specifications from existing codebases. Use when working with legacy or undocumented systems, inherited projects, or old codebases with no documentation. Invoke to map code dependencies, generate API documentation from source, identify undocumented business logic, figure out what code does, or create architecture documentation from implementation. Trigger phrases: reverse engineer, old codebase, no docs, no documentation, figure out how this works, inherited project, legacy analysis, code archaeology, undocumented features.

94

1.21x
Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

95%

1.21x

Average score across 6 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Risky

Do not use without reviewing

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Discovery

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a strong skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides specific concrete actions, comprehensive trigger terms that match natural user language, explicit 'Use when' and 'Invoke to' guidance, and a clearly distinctive niche. The only minor note is the use of 'specialist that' which is acceptable third-person framing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'map code dependencies', 'generate API documentation from source', 'identify undocumented business logic', 'figure out what code does', 'create architecture documentation from implementation'. These are clear, actionable capabilities.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (extracts specifications, maps dependencies, generates API docs, identifies business logic, creates architecture docs) and 'when' (legacy/undocumented systems, inherited projects, old codebases with no documentation), with explicit 'Use when' and 'Invoke to' clauses plus trigger phrases.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say, including explicit trigger phrases like 'reverse engineer', 'old codebase', 'no docs', 'figure out how this works', 'inherited project', 'legacy analysis', 'code archaeology', 'undocumented features'. These are highly natural and varied.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche around reverse-engineering and legacy/undocumented codebases. The specific focus on 'inherited projects', 'code archaeology', and 'undocumented' systems makes it highly distinguishable from general code analysis or documentation skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Implementation

85%

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

This is a well-structured skill with strong actionability and excellent progressive disclosure. The workflow is clear with an appropriate validation checkpoint, and the EARS format reference provides immediately usable patterns. Minor verbosity in the role definition and 'When to Use' sections, plus some obvious constraints, prevent a perfect conciseness score.

Suggestions

Remove or significantly trim the 'When to Use This Skill' section since this context is already captured in the skill's metadata/description and doesn't add actionable guidance.

Trim the MUST DO/MUST NOT DO lists to only non-obvious constraints—items like 'Make assumptions without code evidence' and 'Use Read, Grep, Glob extensively' are already implied by the workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Generally efficient but includes some unnecessary framing (e.g., 'When to Use This Skill' section largely restates the skill description, and the 'Role Definition' with hat metaphors adds little actionable value). The EARS table and exploration patterns earn their place, but the MUST DO/MUST NOT DO lists contain some obvious guidance Claude wouldn't need (e.g., 'Make assumptions without code evidence').

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable Glob/Grep patterns, a well-structured EARS format table with specific examples, clear output structure requirements, and a named output path. The exploration patterns are copy-paste ready and the EARS examples are directly usable.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step core workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit validation checkpoint after the Explore step that includes specific criteria for when to proceed vs. continue exploring. The workflow covers the full lifecycle from scoping through documentation with a flagging step for uncertainties.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Excellent progressive disclosure with a clear overview in the main file and a well-organized reference table pointing to four specific reference files, each with clear 'Load When' guidance. References are one level deep and clearly signaled with contextual triggers.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
jeffallan/claude-skills
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.