simulating-flash-loans
Simulate flash loan strategies with profitability calculations and risk assessment across Aave, dYdX, and Balancer. Use when simulating flash loans, analyzing arbitrage profitability, evaluating liquidation opportunities, or comparing flash loan providers. Trigger with phrases like "simulate flash loan", "flash loan arbitrage", "liquidation profit", "compare Aave dYdX", "flash loan strategy", or "DeFi arbitrage simulation".
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills --skill simulating-flash-loans85
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
100%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 is an excellent skill description that hits all the marks. It provides specific capabilities (simulation, profitability calculations, risk assessment), names concrete platforms, includes comprehensive trigger terms that users would naturally say, and has explicit 'Use when' and 'Trigger with' clauses. The DeFi/flash loan focus makes it highly distinctive.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'simulate flash loan strategies', 'profitability calculations', 'risk assessment', and names specific platforms (Aave, dYdX, Balancer). Uses third person voice correctly. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (simulate flash loan strategies with profitability calculations and risk assessment) AND when (explicit 'Use when...' clause covering simulating, analyzing, evaluating, and comparing scenarios, plus explicit trigger phrases). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'simulate flash loan', 'flash loan arbitrage', 'liquidation profit', 'compare Aave dYdX', 'flash loan strategy', 'DeFi arbitrage simulation'. Includes both technical terms and natural phrases. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche focusing specifically on flash loans, DeFi arbitrage, and named protocols (Aave, dYdX, Balancer). Very unlikely to conflict with general finance or other crypto skills due to specific terminology. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides highly actionable CLI-based guidance for flash loan simulation with good progressive disclosure to reference files. However, it's somewhat verbose with explanatory content Claude doesn't need (overview, disclaimer, extensive resources), and lacks explicit validation checkpoints that would be important for financial simulation workflows.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly trim the Overview, Prerequisites explanation, and Educational Disclaimer sections - Claude understands flash loans and doesn't need warnings about legal implications
Add explicit validation steps after RPC configuration (e.g., 'Verify connection: python scripts/flash_simulator.py ping') and before acting on simulation results
Consolidate the Resources section into the references folder rather than inline links Claude can find independently
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary explanation (overview section, educational disclaimer, extensive resources list) that Claude doesn't need. The prerequisites section explaining what flash loans are and the detailed provider comparison table add bulk, though the core instructions are reasonably efficient. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable CLI commands with specific flags and arguments. Each step shows exact commands to run with concrete examples of expected output formats. The code is copy-paste ready with clear parameter patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly numbered and sequenced, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints. For financial simulations involving risk assessment, there should be explicit verification steps (e.g., 'verify RPC connection before proceeding', 'validate output before acting on results'). The workflow is linear without feedback loops for error recovery. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections. Appropriately references external files for detailed content (errors.md, examples.md) with one-level-deep navigation. The main skill provides a complete overview while pointing to supplementary materials for depth. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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 — 13 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 13 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.