evernote-rate-limits
Handle Evernote API rate limits effectively. Use when implementing rate limit handling, optimizing API usage, or troubleshooting rate limit errors. Trigger with phrases like "evernote rate limit", "evernote throttling", "api quota evernote", "rate limit exceeded".
77
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/saas-packs/evernote-pack/skills/evernote-rate-limits/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%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 well-structured skill description with strong trigger terms and clear 'what/when' guidance. Its main weakness is that the capabilities described are somewhat general—it says 'handle rate limits effectively' without specifying concrete techniques like exponential backoff, retry logic, or quota monitoring. The explicit trigger phrases and Evernote-specific focus make it highly distinctive.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Implements exponential backoff, manages retry logic, monitors API quota usage, and handles 429 status codes for Evernote API rate limits.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Evernote API rate limits) and some actions (implementing rate limit handling, optimizing API usage, troubleshooting rate limit errors), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like retry strategies, backoff algorithms, quota monitoring, or specific error code handling. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (handle Evernote API rate limits) and 'when' (implementing rate limit handling, optimizing API usage, troubleshooting rate limit errors) with explicit trigger phrases provided. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good natural trigger terms that users would actually say: 'evernote rate limit', 'evernote throttling', 'api quota evernote', 'rate limit exceeded'. These cover common variations of how users would describe this problem. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very specific niche combining Evernote + rate limiting. The trigger terms are highly distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills, as they target a very specific API platform and a specific concern (rate limits). | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill has good structure and progressive disclosure, with a clear overview that points to deeper references. However, it suffers from inconsistent actionability—Steps 1-2 have executable code while Steps 3-5 are vague prose descriptions. The prerequisites section and some descriptive text add unnecessary tokens without adding value for Claude.
Suggestions
Add executable code examples for Steps 3-5 (batch operations, caching strategy, and monitoring) or explicitly defer them to the implementation guide rather than leaving them as vague prose descriptions.
Remove the Prerequisites section—Claude already understands async/await, error handling, and SDK setup concepts.
Add a validation checkpoint after Step 2, such as a test snippet that deliberately triggers a rate limit to confirm retry behavior works correctly.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary filler (e.g., 'Prerequisites' listing things Claude already knows like 'Understanding of async/await patterns', 'Error handling implementation'). Steps 3-5 describe what to do in prose without providing code, which adds bulk without proportional value. The overview is reasonably tight but the overall document could be trimmed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Steps 1 and 2 provide executable JavaScript code, which is good. However, Steps 3, 4, and 5 are purely descriptive with no concrete code—just vague instructions like 'Process items sequentially with delay' and 'Track request counts.' The Examples section describes scenarios in prose without executable code. This inconsistency leaves significant gaps in actionability. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The steps are numbered and sequenced logically, and the error handling table provides useful decision guidance. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints—no step says 'verify the rate limiter is working by testing with X' or 'confirm retry behavior before deploying.' For operations that involve retries and batch processing, the lack of verification steps is a notable gap. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill provides a clear overview with well-structured sections, and appropriately references an implementation guide for complete code. External resources are clearly signaled with links. The content is split logically between the overview skill and the referenced implementation guide, with one-level-deep navigation. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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
70e9fa4
- 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.