license-compliance-scanner
License Compliance Scanner - Auto-activating skill for Security Fundamentals. Triggers on: license compliance scanner, license compliance scanner Part of the Security Fundamentals skill category.
36
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
96%
1.03xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/03-security-fundamentals/license-compliance-scanner/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 placeholder that restates the skill name without describing any concrete capabilities, use cases, or meaningful trigger terms. It lacks both a 'what it does' explanation and a 'when to use it' clause, making it nearly useless for skill selection among multiple options.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Scans project dependencies for license compliance issues, identifies restrictive licenses (GPL, AGPL), and generates compliance reports.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about open source license compliance, dependency license checks, license audits, or mentions GPL/MIT/Apache licensing concerns.'
Remove the redundant duplicate trigger term and expand with varied natural keywords users would actually say, such as 'license audit', 'open source compliance', 'dependency licenses', 'SPDX', 'license violations'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the skill ('License Compliance Scanner') but provides no concrete actions. There is no mention of what the skill actually does—no verbs like 'scans', 'detects', 'reports', or 'validates' are present. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond restating the skill name, and the 'when' clause is limited to a redundant trigger phrase with no explicit 'Use when...' guidance or meaningful context. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'license compliance scanner' repeated twice. There are no natural user keywords like 'license check', 'dependency licenses', 'open source compliance', 'GPL', 'MIT license', or 'SPDX' that a user would naturally say. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The term 'license compliance scanner' is somewhat specific to a niche domain, which reduces conflict risk slightly. However, the lack of concrete actions or scope means it could overlap with other security or compliance-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 essentially a placeholder with no substantive content. It contains only meta-descriptions of what it claims to do without any actual instructions, code, commands, or concrete guidance for license compliance scanning. It fails on every dimension because it provides zero actionable information.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable examples of license scanning (e.g., using tools like `license_finder`, `scancode-toolkit`, or `fossa` with actual CLI commands and expected output formats).
Define a clear workflow: 1) scan dependencies, 2) parse results, 3) flag non-compliant licenses, 4) validate against an allowlist — with specific commands and validation steps at each stage.
Remove all meta-description sections ('Purpose', 'When to Use', 'Example Triggers', 'Capabilities') and replace with actual technical content such as license categorization rules, SPDX identifiers, and compliance policy templates.
Add references to supplementary files for advanced topics like handling dual-licensed packages, creating license exception policies, or integrating scanning into CI/CD pipelines.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is almost entirely filler and meta-description. It explains what the skill does in abstract terms without providing any actual technical content. Phrases like 'Provides step-by-step guidance' and 'Follows industry best practices' are empty padding. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete, executable guidance. No code, no commands, no specific steps, no examples of actual license scanning. The entire content 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 contains none. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic block of vague descriptions with no references to detailed materials, no links to related files, and no structured navigation to deeper 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
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.