webhook-retry-handler
Webhook Retry Handler - Auto-activating skill for API Integration. Triggers on: webhook retry handler, webhook retry handler Part of the API Integration skill category.
34
Quality
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
87%
1.06xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/16-api-integration/webhook-retry-handler/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 provides almost no useful information for skill selection. It lacks concrete actions, meaningful trigger terms, and any guidance on when to use it. The only distinguishing element is the specific term 'webhook retry handler' which provides minimal differentiation.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Handles failed webhook deliveries by implementing exponential backoff, logging retry attempts, and managing dead letter queues'
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'Use when webhooks fail, need retry logic, webhook delivery errors, or implementing webhook resilience'
Add variations of trigger terms users might naturally say: 'webhook failure', 'retry failed webhooks', 'webhook error', 'resend webhook', 'webhook timeout'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description only names the skill ('Webhook Retry Handler') and its category ('API Integration') without describing any concrete actions. No specific capabilities like 'retry failed webhooks', 'configure retry intervals', or 'log retry attempts' are mentioned. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond the name, and provides no 'when should Claude use it' guidance. There is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms are just the skill name repeated twice ('webhook retry handler, webhook retry handler'). This is redundant and misses natural variations users might say like 'retry webhook', 'failed webhook', 'webhook failure', 'resend webhook', or 'webhook error handling'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'webhook retry handler' is somewhat specific to a niche domain, the lack of detail about what distinguishes this from general API error handling or other webhook-related skills creates potential overlap. The category 'API Integration' is broad. | 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 content is a template placeholder with no actual technical substance. It describes what a webhook retry handler skill should do without providing any implementation details, code examples, retry strategies, or concrete guidance. The entire content is meta-description that adds no value beyond what the skill's title already conveys.
Suggestions
Add concrete code examples showing exponential backoff retry logic with specific timing parameters (e.g., initial delay, max retries, backoff multiplier)
Include a clear workflow for handling webhook failures: receive -> validate -> process -> retry on failure -> dead letter queue
Provide specific HTTP status codes that should trigger retries (e.g., 429, 503) vs. those that should not (e.g., 400, 401)
Add example implementations for common webhook retry patterns (exponential backoff, jitter, circuit breaker) with executable code
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler text with no actual technical content. It explains what the skill does in abstract terms without providing any concrete implementation details, wasting tokens on meta-descriptions Claude doesn't need. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | No executable code, commands, or concrete guidance provided. The content only describes what the skill 'could' do in vague terms like 'provides step-by-step guidance' without actually providing any guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined. There are no steps, no validation checkpoints, and no actual process for implementing webhook retry handling. The content is purely descriptive metadata. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No structure for progressive disclosure exists. There are no references to detailed documentation, no examples, and no links to related materials. The content is a shallow placeholder with no depth. | 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.