flame-graph-generator
Flame Graph Generator - Auto-activating skill for Performance Testing. Triggers on: flame graph generator, flame graph generator Part of the Performance Testing skill category.
35
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/10-performance-testing/flame-graph-generator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
7%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 title and category label with no substantive content. It fails to describe concrete actions, lacks natural trigger terms users would say, and provides no explicit guidance on when Claude should select this skill. The only saving grace is that 'flame graph' is a somewhat distinctive term.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Generates flame graphs from profiling data, visualizes CPU/memory hotspots, and parses stack trace samples to identify performance bottlenecks.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about flame graphs, flamegraphs, profiling visualization, stack trace analysis, CPU hotspots, or perf data rendering.'
Remove the duplicated trigger term ('flame graph generator' listed twice) and expand with varied natural keywords users might actually say, such as 'flamegraph', 'profiling', 'performance visualization', 'stack traces'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain ('Performance Testing') and the output ('Flame Graph') but does not describe any concrete actions like 'generate flame graphs from profiling data', 'parse stack traces', or 'visualize CPU/memory hotspots'. It is essentially just a title repeated with category metadata. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is barely stated (generates flame graphs, implied from the title) and the 'when' is entirely missing—there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance. Both dimensions are very weak. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'flame graph generator' repeated twice. It misses natural user phrases like 'flame graph', 'flamegraph', 'profiling', 'CPU hotspot', 'stack trace visualization', 'perf data', etc. Very poor keyword coverage. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The term 'flame graph' is fairly niche and unlikely to conflict with many other skills, which provides some natural distinctiveness. However, the broad 'Performance Testing' category label could overlap with other performance-related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 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 contains only generic boilerplate text that describes what a skill could do without providing any actual instructions, code, commands, or technical guidance for generating flame graphs. It fails on every dimension because it teaches Claude nothing actionable.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code examples for generating flame graphs (e.g., using perf, dtrace, async-profiler, or py-spy to capture stack traces and then folding/rendering them with flamegraph.pl or speedscope).
Define a clear multi-step workflow: 1) capture profiling data, 2) fold/transform stacks, 3) generate SVG, 4) validate output — with specific commands at each step.
Remove all boilerplate sections ('When to Use', 'Example Triggers', 'Capabilities') that provide no technical value and replace with actual tool-specific guidance and configuration examples.
Add references to specific tools and their options (e.g., `perf record -F 99 -g -p <PID>`, `flamegraph.pl --color=java`) rather than abstract descriptions of capabilities.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and boilerplate. It explains nothing Claude doesn't already know, repeats 'flame graph generator' excessively, and provides zero actual technical content about generating flame graphs. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There are no concrete commands, code examples, tool references, or executable guidance. The skill describes what it could do in abstract terms ('provides step-by-step guidance') without actually providing any guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow, steps, or process is defined. There is no sequence of actions, no validation checkpoints, and no actual instructions for generating flame graphs. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a flat, uninformative document with no references to detailed materials, no links to examples or advanced guides, and no meaningful structure beyond generic section headers. | 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
3076d78
- 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.