code-documentation-analyzer
Code Documentation Analyzer - Auto-activating skill for Technical Documentation. Triggers on: code documentation analyzer, code documentation analyzer Part of the Technical Documentation skill category.
32
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
88%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/17-technical-docs/code-documentation-analyzer/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%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 description is essentially a placeholder with no substantive content. It names a broad domain ('Code Documentation Analyzer') but provides zero concrete actions, no natural trigger terms, no 'Use when' guidance, and nothing to distinguish it from other documentation-related skills. It appears to be auto-generated boilerplate rather than a thoughtfully crafted description.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Analyzes code documentation coverage, identifies undocumented functions, generates docstrings, and evaluates documentation quality.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to review documentation, add docstrings, check doc coverage, generate API docs, or improve code comments.'
Remove the duplicate trigger term and replace with diverse natural keywords users would actually say, such as 'docstrings', 'API docs', 'code comments', 'README', 'JSDoc', 'documentation coverage'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a domain ('Code Documentation' / 'Technical Documentation') but lists no concrete actions whatsoever. There is no mention of what the skill actually does—no verbs like 'analyze', 'generate', 'extract', or 'review' with specific objects. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. There is no explanation of capabilities and no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'code documentation analyzer' repeated twice. These are not natural phrases a user would say; users are more likely to say 'document my code', 'add docstrings', 'generate API docs', etc. No common variations or natural keywords are provided. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is extremely generic—'Technical Documentation' and 'Code Documentation' could overlap with any number of skills related to code comments, API documentation, README generation, docstring writing, etc. There is nothing to distinguish this skill from other documentation-related skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an empty template with no substantive content. It repeatedly references 'code documentation analyzer' without ever defining what that means, how to do it, or providing any actionable guidance. It fails on every dimension because it contains no concrete instructions, code, workflows, or structured references.
Suggestions
Define what 'code documentation analyzer' actually does—e.g., extracting docstrings, generating API docs, auditing documentation coverage—and provide concrete executable examples for each use case.
Add a step-by-step workflow with specific commands/tools (e.g., using pydoc, Sphinx, JSDoc, or custom scripts) and include validation steps to verify documentation output quality.
Remove all boilerplate sections ('When to Use', 'Example Triggers', 'Capabilities') that restate the skill name without adding information, and replace them with actionable content.
If the skill covers multiple sub-topics (API docs, user guides, architecture docs), create separate reference files and link to them from a concise overview section.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and boilerplate. It explains nothing Claude doesn't already know, provides no specific technical content, and every section restates the same vague idea ('code documentation analyzer') without adding value. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance—no code, no commands, no specific steps, no examples of actual documentation analysis. Every bullet point is abstract and describes rather than instructs. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined at all. There are no steps, no sequence, no validation checkpoints. The skill claims to provide 'step-by-step guidance' but delivers none. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic block of vague descriptions with no references to supporting files, no structured navigation, and no bundle files to support it. There is nothing to progressively disclose because there is no substantive content. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 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 — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
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 | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
3a2d27d
- 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.