run-quality-checks

Run all quality checks including linting, type checking, and tests. Use when the user wants to verify code quality, before committing, or when preparing a PR.

4.54x

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

4.54x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

87%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable and token-efficient, presenting executable commands in a clean, well-organized structure. The gap is workflow clarity: the pipeline lacks explicit validation/feedback guidance for what to do when a check fails.

Suggestions

Add a short "If a check fails" note describing how to read the failure, fix, and re-run only the failing step before continuing the pipeline.

Clarify which checks are mandatory vs. optional for a PR (e.g. is test:e2e part of the gate?) so the pipeline intent is unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a lean catalog of commands with one-line descriptions and no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place.	3 / 3
Actionability	Each step gives a concrete, executable `npm run ...` command in a fenced block, and the pipeline is copy-paste ready.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The "Complete Quality Pipeline" sequences steps with `&&`, but validation checkpoints are only implicit (stop-on-failure) and there is no error-recovery guidance for the batch of checks.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files and no need for external references, yet is organized into clear sections (When to Use, Instructions, Complete Quality Pipeline).	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

92%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is concise, concrete, and answers both what and when with explicit natural-language triggers. Its main weakness is modest distinctiveness, since 'run all quality checks' is a fairly generic framing that could collide with other testing or linting skills.

Suggestions

Tie the description to its specific project/tooling (e.g. name the Spark UI project or the Oxlint/Oxfmt/Playwright stack) to sharpen distinctiveness.

Add a couple more natural trigger variations users might say (e.g. 'lint', 'typecheck', 'run tests') to broaden trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Run all quality checks including linting, type checking, and tests" names multiple concrete actions rather than vague language, matching the top anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	It states both what it does (run linting, type checking, tests) and an explicit "Use when the user wants to verify code quality, before committing, or when preparing a PR" clause.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Triggers like "verify code quality", "before committing", and "preparing a PR" are natural phrases a user would say, giving good coverage.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Run all quality checks" is broad and could overlap with generic lint/test skills; the commit/PR triggers help but the niche is not sharply distinct.	2 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: leboncoin/spark-web
Path: .cursor/skills/run-quality-checks/SKILL.md
Commit: 9f4792e

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.