CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

skill-refactor

Scan Codex session history for skill failures, usage patterns, and coverage gaps. Use when the user wants daily skill-health monitoring or evidence-backed recommendations about installing, improving, merging, or pruning skills.

52

Quality

57%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

The risk profile of this skill

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./Plugins/skill-factory/fixtures/budget-archive/2026-04-19/skills/data_fetch_analysis/skill-refactor/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

14%Scale 1-3

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 stub—it provides a one-line description and a single reference to an external file that is not included in the bundle. There are no actionable instructions, no workflow steps, no examples, and no concrete guidance for Claude to follow when performing skill reliability analysis. The content fails to deliver on its stated purpose of analyzing skill reliability and returning prioritized recommendations.

Suggestions

Add concrete workflow steps: describe how to scan session history, what patterns to look for (e.g., error types, frequency thresholds), and how to structure the output recommendations.

Include at least one concrete example showing sample input (e.g., a session log snippet) and expected output (e.g., a prioritized recommendation list with specific format).

Either inline the key content from contract.yaml or provide the bundle file so the reference is functional; a skill that is entirely dependent on an unavailable reference is not actionable.

Add validation/verification steps, such as how to confirm findings before making recommendations (e.g., minimum evidence thresholds, cross-referencing multiple sessions).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is very brief (only 3 lines of body), which is lean, but it's so sparse that it's hard to judge whether every token earns its place—the one-line description is somewhat vague rather than precisely informative.

2 / 3

Actionability

There are no concrete steps, commands, code examples, or specific instructions. The entire actionable content is deferred to a referenced file (contract.yaml) that is not provided in the bundle, leaving the skill body with no executable guidance.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There is no workflow, no sequenced steps, no validation checkpoints, and no description of how to perform the analysis or generate recommendations. The task involves multi-step analysis (scanning sessions, identifying failures, prioritizing recommendations) but none of this is articulated.

1 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references ./references/contract.yaml but no bundle files are provided, meaning the reference is unverifiable and potentially broken. There is no other structure, no overview content, and the entire skill is essentially a stub pointing to a single file.

1 / 3

Total

5

/

12

Passed

Description

100%Scale 1-3

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 a well-crafted skill description that clearly communicates both its purpose and trigger conditions. It uses specific, concrete language about scanning session history and identifying skill issues, and provides an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms. The description occupies a distinct niche around skill-health diagnostics that is unlikely to conflict with other skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'scan session history for skill failures, usage patterns, and coverage gaps' plus 'installing, improving, merging, or pruning skills'. These are concrete, actionable capabilities.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both what ('Scan Codex session history for skill failures, usage patterns, and coverage gaps') and when ('Use when the user wants daily skill-health monitoring or evidence-backed recommendations about installing, improving, merging, or pruning skills') with an explicit 'Use when' clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'skill failures', 'usage patterns', 'coverage gaps', 'skill-health monitoring', 'installing', 'improving', 'merging', 'pruning skills', 'session history'. These cover a good range of how users would phrase requests about skill management and diagnostics.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive niche focused on Codex session history analysis and skill-health monitoring. The combination of 'session history', 'skill failures', 'coverage gaps', and skill lifecycle management (install/improve/merge/prune) creates a clear, unique identity unlikely to conflict with other skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
jscraik/Agent-Skills
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.