readme-generator
Readme Generator - Auto-activating skill for Technical Documentation. Triggers on: readme generator, readme generator Part of the Technical Documentation skill category.
36
Quality
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.02xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/17-technical-docs/readme-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 template placeholder with minimal useful content. It lacks concrete actions, meaningful trigger terms, and explicit usage guidance. The redundant trigger term and reliance on category labels instead of actual capability descriptions make it ineffective for skill selection.
Suggestions
Add specific actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Generates README.md files with project structure, installation instructions, usage examples, and contribution guidelines'
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger scenarios like 'Use when the user asks to create a README, document a project, or needs help with README.md files'
Expand trigger terms to include variations users would naturally say: 'README', 'readme file', 'README.md', 'project documentation', 'document this repo'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description only says 'Readme Generator' and 'Technical Documentation' without describing any concrete actions. It doesn't explain what the skill actually does (e.g., 'generates README files', 'creates documentation sections', 'adds badges'). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond the name, and the 'when' guidance is just a category label ('Technical Documentation') rather than explicit trigger scenarios. No 'Use when...' clause is present. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms listed are just 'readme generator' repeated twice, which is redundant and misses natural variations users would say like 'README', 'readme file', 'project documentation', 'create a readme', or 'README.md'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'readme generator' is somewhat specific to README files, the vague 'Technical Documentation' category could overlap with other documentation skills. The lack of specific actions makes it harder to distinguish from general documentation tools. | 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 entirely meta-content describing what a README generator skill would do, without providing any actual README generation guidance. It contains no templates, no examples, no structure recommendations, and no actionable instructions. The content is essentially a placeholder that would provide no value to Claude when generating READMEs.
Suggestions
Add a concrete README template with sections (Title, Description, Installation, Usage, Contributing, License) that Claude can adapt
Include 2-3 example README outputs for different project types (library, CLI tool, web app) showing expected format and content
Provide specific instructions for extracting project information (reading package.json, pyproject.toml, etc.) to populate README sections
Add a checklist of README quality criteria (badges, code examples, clear installation steps) for validation
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is padded with generic boilerplate that provides no actual value. Phrases like 'provides automated assistance' and 'follows industry best practices' are vague filler that Claude doesn't need. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance - no code examples, no specific commands, no actual instructions on how to generate a README. The content only describes what the skill supposedly does without showing how. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined. There are no steps, no sequence, and 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 meta-description with no actual content to organize. There are no references to detailed materials, examples, or templates that would be essential for a README generator skill. | 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
0c08951
- 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.