CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

assetsonar

AssetSonar integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows. Use when the user wants to interact with AssetSonar data.

Quality

69%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/assetsonar/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The content is a strong, executable CLI playbook with a sensible connection-to-action workflow and real error-recovery checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are a padded introductory paragraph, a broken step-numbering scheme ("Step 2" is referenced but never defined), and sections that restate or list content without adding guidance.

Suggestions

Delete or compress the opening background paragraph about what AssetSonar is and who uses it — Claude can infer this from the docs link, and it spends tokens without guidance value.

Fix the dangling workflow numbering: either number the sections (Step 1: connect, Step 2: search actions, Step 3: run) or replace "skip to Step 2" with the actual section name ("Searching for actions").

Give the entity list under "AssetSonar Overview" a purpose (e.g. one line per entity naming its most common action) or remove it along with the filler line "Use action names and parameters as needed".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient concrete commands, but includes unnecessary explanation — the marketing-style intro ("AssetSonar is an IT asset management platform that helps organizations track and manage their hardware, software, and other assets. It's used by IT managers, procurement teams, and finance departments...") plus filler like "Use action names and parameters as needed" — fitting anchor 3 ("Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened") rather than anchor 4's minor trims.

3 / 5

Actionability

Nearly all guidance is executable and copy-paste ready ("npm install -g @membranehq/cli@latest", "membrane connection ensure 'https://ezo.io/assetsonar/' --json", "membrane action run <actionId> --connectionId=... --input '{...}' --json", plus the proxy flag table), but minor gaps remain — the "--tenant" flag value is unexplained and no concrete AssetSonar action example (e.g. listing assets) is shown — so anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

There is a clear install → login → connection ensure → poll-until-READY → search actions → run → proxy-fallback sequence with state-machine checkpoints (handling CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED, CONFIGURATION_ERROR/SETUP_FAILED via the error field), matching anchor 4; it falls short of anchor 5 because the numbered-step structure is broken — "skip to Step 2" references a step label that doesn't exist (sections jump from "1b" to unnumbered ones), leaving navigation/validation of results partially implicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the single-file body is well sectioned (install, auth, connection, searching, running, proxy, best practices) with no dangling file references, matching anchor 4's "Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps"; it is not a 5 because the ~145-line body inlines Membrane-generic reference material (proxy flag table, connection state machine) that could be split out, and thin sections like the bare entity list and "Popular actions" (which repeats the search command) add little.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

57%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 correctly names the target application and includes an explicit "Use when" clause, but its capability language is generic. It misses the domain's natural vocabulary (assets, inventory, IT asset management) and concrete actions that would sharpen both trigger matching and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Replace the generic verbs with domain-concrete actions, e.g. "Track and manage IT assets, asset stock, software licenses, purchase orders, service contracts, vendors, locations, and audits via the AssetSonar API."

Add natural trigger terms and synonyms users would say, such as "assets", "inventory", "hardware", or "IT asset management", to the Use-when clause.

Broaden the when-clause beyond "interact with AssetSonar data" to cover common intents like looking up assets, updating records, or running an asset audit.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Manage data, records, and automate workflows" names the AssetSonar domain but the actions are generic, matching the anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" (e.g. "Processes PDF files"); it never states concrete capabilities like tracking assets, managing purchase orders, or running audits, so it does not reach anchor 3's 1-2 concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

It has both a "what" ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows") and an explicit "when" ("Use when the user wants to interact with AssetSonar data"), satisfying the anchor-4 pattern; it is not a 5 because the "what" is vague and the "when" is a single narrow trigger rather than concrete trigger phrases.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"AssetSonar" (repeated) is the key natural term a user would say, but common variations and synonyms are absent — no "assets", "inventory", "hardware", or "IT asset management" — fitting anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms") rather than anchor 4's good keyword coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The brand-name trigger ("interact with AssetSonar data") gives it a mostly distinct niche with minor overlap risk from the generic verbs "Manage data, records, and automate workflows", which could overlap data/CRM/database integration skills — anchor 4, not 5 since the action language is not a clearly distinct trigger.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

membranedev/application-skills

Path

skills/assetsonar/SKILL.md

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.