hwc-forms-validation
Handle Hotwire form workflows: form submission lifecycle, inline editing, validation errors, typeahead/autocomplete, modal forms, and external form controls. Prefer this skill when the core problem is correctness and UX of form interaction. Use hwc-navigation-content for pagination/tabs/filter navigation, hwc-realtime-streaming for WebSocket/Turbo Stream broadcasting, hwc-media-content for image/video/audio behavior, hwc-ux-feedback for generic loading/transition polish, and hwc-stimulus-fundamentals for framework-level Stimulus APIs not tied to forms.
71
86%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
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 clearly defines its scope (Hotwire form workflows), lists specific concrete capabilities, provides explicit trigger guidance, and proactively disambiguates from five related skills. The boundary-setting with other skills is particularly strong and would help Claude select the right skill even among a large pool of Hotwire-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: form submission lifecycle, inline editing, validation errors, typeahead/autocomplete, modal forms, and external form controls. These are all distinct, concrete capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (handle Hotwire form workflows with specific capabilities listed) and when ('Prefer this skill when the core problem is correctness and UX of form interaction'). Also explicitly delineates boundaries by naming other skills for adjacent concerns. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'form submission', 'inline editing', 'validation errors', 'typeahead', 'autocomplete', 'modal forms', 'form controls', 'Hotwire'. These cover common variations of form-related queries. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Exceptionally distinctive — explicitly names five related skills and explains when to use each instead, creating very clear boundaries. The focus on 'form interaction' correctness and UX is a well-defined niche within the Hotwire ecosystem. | 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 is a well-structured, concise skill that excels at progressive disclosure and token efficiency. Its main weakness is the lack of any concrete code examples—even a single Turbo Frame form snippet with a 422 response pattern would make the guidance significantly more actionable. The workflow is reasonable but would benefit from explicit validation/verification checkpoints for the rerender and redirect behaviors it describes.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete, executable code example showing a Turbo Frame wrapping a form with a 422 validation error rerender pattern (HTML + controller response).
Add a verification step to the core workflow, e.g., 'Confirm the frame rerenders only the form scope and does not replace unrelated page content' after step 3.
Consider adding a minimal Stimulus controller snippet for the debounced typeahead or turbo:submit-end handler to make the guardrails more actionable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every line earns its place. No explanation of what Turbo Frames or Stimulus are, no padding about HTTP status codes. The guardrails are terse and specific. The skill assumes Claude knows Hotwire and focuses only on decision-making guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The core workflow provides clear decision steps and specific HTTP status codes (422/303), and the guardrails give concrete constraints (use HTML `form` attribute, debounce keystrokes). However, there are no executable code examples—no HTML snippets, no Stimulus controller fragments, no ERB templates. For a forms skill, at least one concrete form+frame example would significantly improve actionability. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step core workflow provides a reasonable sequence, but it lacks validation checkpoints. There's no explicit 'verify the frame rerenders correctly' step, no feedback loop for when 422 responses don't render as expected, and no guidance on testing/confirming post-submit behavior. For a workflow involving form submission lifecycles and rerenders, missing verification steps cap this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure: concise overview in the body with clearly signaled one-level-deep references for each specific form pattern. The 'Load References Selectively' section with labeled links and the 'Escalate to Neighbor Skills' section provide clear navigation. The instruction to open only the needed file is a smart touch. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- lucianghinda/superpowers-ruby
- Commit
c037ce3
- 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.