juicebox-common-errors
Diagnose and fix Juicebox API errors. Trigger: "juicebox error", "fix juicebox", "debug juicebox".
68
62%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/saas-packs/juicebox-pack/skills/juicebox-common-errors/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
75%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 is functional and clearly scoped to a specific product (Juicebox API), which gives it strong distinctiveness. It includes explicit trigger terms and answers both what and when. However, it could benefit from more specific concrete actions beyond 'diagnose and fix' and broader trigger term coverage to capture more natural user phrasings.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Diagnose and fix Juicebox API errors including authentication failures, rate limiting, malformed requests, and response parsing issues.'
Expand trigger terms to include natural variations like 'Juicebox not working', 'Juicebox API issue', 'Juicebox troubleshoot', 'Juicebox 500 error', 'Juicebox timeout'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Juicebox API) and two general actions (diagnose and fix errors), but does not list specific concrete actions like parsing error codes, checking authentication, validating endpoints, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (diagnose and fix Juicebox API errors) and 'when' (explicit trigger terms provided). The trigger clause is present and explicit. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant trigger terms ('juicebox error', 'fix juicebox', 'debug juicebox') but misses common variations users might say like 'API error', 'Juicebox not working', 'Juicebox API issue', '500 error juicebox', or 'juicebox troubleshoot'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Juicebox API' is a very specific product/domain, making this skill clearly distinguishable from other skills and unlikely to conflict with generic debugging or API skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides a solid error reference table and some useful code snippets, but suffers from significant redundancy—the same information about rate limits, dataset constraints, and timeouts appears in the error table, the debugging guide, and the error handling table. The TypeScript error handler classifies errors but doesn't implement actual recovery logic (backoff, retry). The referenced 'juicebox-debug-bundle' doesn't exist, leaving a dead reference.
Suggestions
Eliminate redundancy by removing the 'Debugging Guide' prose section and consolidating all information into the error reference table and error handling scenario table.
Extend the TypeScript error handler to include actual retry/backoff logic rather than just classification, making it copy-paste ready for real integrations.
Add an explicit diagnostic workflow with validation steps: e.g., 1. Run health check → 2. Check quota headers → 3. Validate request format → 4. Verify fix with test call.
Either provide the referenced 'juicebox-debug-bundle' files or remove the dead reference in Next Steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The overview paragraph explains what Juicebox is and provides context that Claude likely doesn't need. The debugging guide section repeats information already present in the error reference table (e.g., rate limits, dataset requirements, timeout details), creating redundancy. However, the tables themselves are efficient. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The error reference table provides concrete fixes, and the TypeScript error handler and curl diagnostic are executable. However, the error handler is a classification function that doesn't actually handle errors (no retry logic, no backoff implementation), and the debugging guide is more descriptive than instructive—it tells you what things are rather than giving step-by-step commands to resolve issues. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The error handling table provides scenario-based recovery patterns, but there are no explicit step-by-step workflows with validation checkpoints. For a debugging skill involving batch operations and destructive retries, the lack of a clear 'diagnose → fix → verify' feedback loop caps this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content references a 'juicebox-debug-bundle' in Next Steps and links to external docs, but no bundle files exist. The skill itself contains some redundancy between the error reference table, debugging guide, and error handling table that could be better organized. The structure has clear sections but inline content is repetitive rather than appropriately split. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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.