klingai-compliance-review
Security and compliance review framework for Kling AI integrations. Use when preparing for audits or reviewing security posture. Trigger with phrases like 'klingai compliance', 'kling ai security review', 'klingai audit prep', 'video generation compliance'.
55
63%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/saas-packs/klingai-pack/skills/klingai-compliance-review/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
62%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 excels at distinctiveness and trigger term coverage, clearly targeting Kling AI security and compliance scenarios. However, it is severely lacking in specificity—it reads as a category label ('review framework') rather than describing concrete actions the skill performs. Adding specific capabilities (e.g., 'generates compliance checklists, reviews API security configurations, audits data handling practices') would significantly improve it.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Generates compliance checklists, reviews API authentication configurations, audits data retention policies, and produces security posture reports for Kling AI integrations.'
Expand the 'what it does' portion to list 3-5 discrete capabilities so Claude understands the scope of tasks this skill covers beyond the vague 'review framework' label.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description says 'security and compliance review framework' but does not list any concrete actions. It doesn't specify what the skill actually does—no mention of specific checks, reports, analyses, or outputs. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | It has a 'Use when' clause addressing audit preparation and security review, but the 'what does this do' part is extremely vague—'review framework' doesn't explain concrete actions or outputs. The when is present but the what is weak. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes several natural trigger phrases: 'klingai compliance', 'kling ai security review', 'klingai audit prep', 'video generation compliance'. These are specific and cover variations a user might naturally say. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'Kling AI' and 'security/compliance review' creates a very specific niche. The trigger terms are highly distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid compliance review framework with strong actionability — concrete checklists, executable code, and specific security guidance. Its main weaknesses are the lack of a sequenced review workflow (steps to follow in order with validation gates) and the monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting detailed code examples into separate referenced files. The content is mostly efficient but some code blocks are longer than necessary.
Suggestions
Add an explicit sequenced workflow at the top (e.g., '1. Run credential audit → 2. Assess data flow → 3. Run automated check → 4. Review GDPR compliance → 5. Generate report') with validation checkpoints between phases.
Extract the GDPR client class and automated compliance check into separate referenced files (e.g., GDPR_CLIENT.md, COMPLIANCE_CHECK.py) and keep only brief summaries with links in the main SKILL.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient with good use of tables and checklists, but the GDPR client class and automated compliance check function are quite lengthy and could be more concise. Some explanatory comments within code are unnecessary for Claude (e.g., citing specific GDPR articles inline). | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides fully executable Python code for GDPR-compliant client patterns, automated compliance checks, and safe logging. The security checklist is concrete with specific thresholds (2500 chars, first 8 chars of key), specific hostnames, and copy-paste ready code. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The checklists provide clear items to verify, and the automated compliance check has a clear pass/warn/fail flow. However, there's no explicit sequenced workflow for conducting a full compliance review — the sections are presented as independent blocks without a clear order of operations or validation checkpoints between steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear section headers and uses tables effectively, but it's a fairly long monolithic document. The GDPR client code and compliance check function could be split into referenced files, and there's no layered overview-to-detail navigation pattern. | 2 / 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
d41e58e
- 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.