CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

checking-infrastructure-compliance

Execute use when you need to work with compliance checking. This skill provides compliance monitoring and validation with comprehensive guidance and automation. Trigger with phrases like "check compliance", "validate policies", or "audit compliance".

60

Quality

71%

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 ./plugins/devops/compliance-checker/skills/checking-infrastructure-compliance/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

80%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 body is concise and highly actionable, with concrete scanner commands and a useful error-handling table. Its main weaknesses are the lack of explicit validation checkpoints woven into the workflow and the failure to link to the bundled template/rules/example-config/script files that already exist alongside it.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation checkpoints to the workflow, e.g. after scanning: 'Confirm checkov/tfsec produced valid JSON/SARIF before mapping findings to controls; re-run with --compact if output is empty.'

Link the existing bundle files from the body — e.g. under Output add 'Use assets/compliance_report_template.md for the report' and 'See scripts/compliance_scan.py for a runnable scan wrapper' — so the bundled material is discoverable.

Reconcile the scripts README (which lists report_formatter.py and remediation_suggestions.py) with the actual scripts/ directory, which only contains compliance_scan.py, to avoid signaling files that are absent.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean — a one-sentence Overview, tight Prerequisites/Instructions/Output lists, a compact Error Handling table, and short Examples — with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' rather than 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' (2).

3 / 3

Actionability

It gives concrete, executable commands throughout ('checkov -d .', 'tfsec .', 'aws iam access-analyzer', 'opa eval -d policy.rego -i input.json', '#checkov:skip=CKV_AWS_18:Reason', 'terraform validate'), matching 'fully executable code/commands; copy-paste ready' rather than 'pseudocode / missing key details' (2).

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 9-step Instructions give a clear sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints in the main flow (e.g. 'confirm scan output is valid before mapping controls'); recovery loops live only in the separate Error Handling table, so checkpoints are 'present but implicit', matching the 2 anchor rather than 'explicit validation steps; feedback loops' (3).

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized, but the body never references the bundled assets/scripts that exist (compliance_report_template.md, compliance_rules.json, example_infrastructure_config.yaml, compliance_scan.py) — useful material that should be signaled is unreachable from SKILL.md, matching 'references present but not clearly signaled; content that should be separate is inline' (2) rather than 'well-signaled one-level-deep references' (3).

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

62%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 surfaces natural trigger terms and a distinct compliance/audit niche, but its capability statement is vague and padded with fluff, the 'Use when' clause is malformed, and second-person phrasing ('you need') triggers the specificity penalty. Tightening the 'what' into concrete actions and rewriting the trigger clause in third person would raise it.

Suggestions

Replace 'compliance monitoring and validation with comprehensive guidance and automation' with concrete actions, e.g. 'Audit Terraform, Kubernetes, and cloud configs against CIS, SOC 2, HIPAA, and PCI-DSS using checkov, tfsec, and OPA; generate reports and remediation patches.'

Rewrite the malformed 'Execute use when you need to work with compliance checking' as a clean third-person trigger, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to check compliance, validate policies, or audit infrastructure configurations.'

Drop the filler phrase 'with comprehensive guidance and automation' — it adds tokens without adding capability information.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes 'compliance monitoring and validation with comprehensive guidance and automation' name the domain and a couple of actions but are padded with vague fluff ('comprehensive guidance and automation'), matching the 'names domain and some actions, not comprehensive' anchor (2); reduced by 1 per the rubric's second-person penalty for 'you need to work with compliance checking', flooring at 1.

1 / 3

Completeness

It states a 'what' ('compliance monitoring and validation') and a 'when' ('Execute use when you need to work with compliance checking' plus 'Trigger with phrases like...'), but the 'what' is weak/filler and the 'Use when' clause is malformed ('Execute use when'), so it does not 'clearly answer both' (3) — it sits at 'has what, when only weakly stated' (2).

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes 'check compliance', 'validate policies', and 'audit compliance' are natural phrases a user would say when they need this skill, giving good coverage rather than just 'some relevant keywords' (2).

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The compliance/audit niche with distinct triggers ('audit compliance', 'check compliance', CIS/SOC2/HIPAA context) is a clear niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor rather than 'could still overlap' (2).

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

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

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-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.