000-jeremy-content-consistency-validator
Validate messaging consistency across website, GitHub repos, and local documentation generating read-only discrepancy reports. Use when checking content alignment or finding mixed messaging. Trigger with phrases like "check consistency", "validate documentation", or "audit messaging".
70
44%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
86%
1.17xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./data/000-jeremy-content-consistency-validator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%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 description that clearly communicates a specific niche (cross-platform messaging consistency validation) with explicit trigger guidance. Its main weakness is that the concrete actions could be slightly more detailed — it describes the general task and output but doesn't enumerate specific sub-capabilities. Overall, it would perform well in a multi-skill selection scenario.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Compares headings, taglines, feature descriptions, and version references across sources' to strengthen specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | It names the domain (messaging consistency) and mentions specific sources (website, GitHub repos, local documentation) and output (discrepancy reports), but doesn't list multiple concrete actions beyond 'validate' and 'generate reports'. The 'read-only' qualifier is helpful but the actual operations are somewhat vague. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (validate messaging consistency across website, GitHub repos, and local docs, generating discrepancy reports) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause and 'Trigger with' phrases providing clear activation guidance). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'check consistency', 'validate documentation', 'audit messaging', 'content alignment', 'mixed messaging'. These are phrases users would naturally say when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche — cross-source messaging consistency validation is a very specific task unlikely to overlap with general documentation or code review skills. The combination of multiple source types and 'read-only discrepancy reports' further narrows the scope. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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 is a hollow template with no actionable content. It describes what a content consistency validator should do at a very high level but provides zero concrete implementation details—no code, no specific commands, no comparison logic, no example outputs, and no real references. It would not enable Claude to perform the task any better than it could without the skill.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code or tool-usage examples showing how to fetch content from each source (e.g., WebFetch calls for website pages, file reads for local docs, GitHub API calls for repo content).
Define specific comparison logic: what fields to extract (version numbers, feature lists, taglines), how to compare them, and what thresholds define critical vs warning discrepancies.
Include a complete example output report showing the expected Markdown format with sample discrepancies, severity levels, and action items.
Either inline the error handling and examples content or provide actual bundle files at the referenced paths—currently the skill delegates essential content to non-existent files.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is padded with vague, generic filler. Phrases like 'automated assistance for the described functionality' add nothing. The Resources section lists abstract concepts ('Content consistency best practices') with no links or specifics. The instructions are high-level descriptions Claude already knows how to reason about, not novel operational knowledge. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There are no concrete commands, code snippets, specific file paths, comparison algorithms, or executable steps. The instructions are entirely abstract ('Extract key messaging, features, versions from each source') with no indication of how to actually do any of it—no tool usage, no parsing logic, no specific fields to compare. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The six numbered steps are vague descriptions of phases rather than a clear, actionable workflow. There are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops for handling discrepancies during the process, no specific tools or commands to run, and no criteria for what constitutes a 'critical discrepancy' vs a 'warning'. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to '{baseDir}/references/errors.md' and '{baseDir}/references/examples.md' point to files that don't exist in the bundle (no bundle files provided). The skill offloads critical content (error handling, examples) to non-existent files, making the skill incomplete and unusable. The Resources section lists concepts with no links. | 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 | |
- Repository
- majiayu000/claude-skill-registry-data
- Commit
2dfa65f
- 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.