CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

codesee

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

Quality

65%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/codesee/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 body is a well-structured, mostly executable guide for driving CodeSee through the Membrane CLI, including a genuine state-machine workflow (poll connection state, branch on client actions, handle error states). Its main weaknesses are scattered padding (marketing intro, unexplained overview tree, duplicate commands), a "Popular actions" section that lists no actions, and workflow cross-references ("Step 2") that do not resolve.

Suggestions

Delete the filler line "When to use which actions: Use action names and parameters as needed.", trim the marketing opener to one factual sentence, and either explain or remove the bare "CodeSee Overview" hierarchy.

Fix workflow navigation: remove or define "Step 2" (referenced twice but never labeled) and make CLI invocation consistent ("membrane" vs "npx @membranehq/cli").

Deduplicate the `action list` command (given in both "Searching for actions" and "Popular actions") and populate "Popular actions" with 2-3 real CodeSee actions with example invocations.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The bulk is lean, executable command guidance, but trimmable content spans several sections: the marketing opener "It's used by software engineers and teams to onboard faster, debug more efficiently...", the unexplained "CodeSee Overview" bullet tree (Workspace/Diagram/File/Node), the filler line "When to use which actions: Use action names and parameters as needed.", and a duplicated `action list` command. This matches "Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened"; not 4 because the padding appears in several places rather than as minor instances.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste-ready commands throughout — "npm install -g @membranehq/cli@latest", "membrane connection ensure \"https://www.codesee.io/\" --json", "membrane action run <actionId> --connectionId=CONNECTION_ID --input '{...}'" — matching "Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps". Not 5 because the "Popular actions" section lists no actual actions and no example shows a CodeSee-specific action invocation end-to-end.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The connection flow has a clear sequence with explicit checkpoints: poll with "--wait" until state changes, branch on READY / CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED (with clientAction fields explained) / CONFIGURATION_ERROR, and "poll again... to check if the state moved to READY" after the user acts. This matches "Clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps". Not 5 because the "skip to **Step 2**" references (appearing twice) point to a step that is never labeled and the numbering ("1b" with no Step 1 or 2) is inconsistent; not 3 because validation checkpoints are explicit, not missing or implicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the ~155-line body is organized into well-labeled sections (Install the CLI, Authentication, Connecting, Searching, Running, Proxy requests, Best practices) with content appropriately inline — matching "Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps". Not 5 because the skill exceeds the simple-skill threshold, the generic Membrane proxy flags table is not CodeSee-specific and could live in a shared reference, and the "Popular actions" section is an empty shell.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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 names the domain (CodeSee) and includes an explicit "Use when" clause, but its capability statement is generic buzzword-level fluff — it never states what CodeSee does (codebase visualization) or any concrete action the skill performs. Triggering therefore depends almost entirely on the user saying the brand name. Suggestions should replace the fluff with concrete capabilities and add natural trigger synonyms.

Suggestions

Replace "Manage data, records, and automate workflows" with concrete CodeSee capabilities, e.g. "Generate codebase diagrams, explore dependency maps, and navigate large repositories."

Add natural trigger terms and synonyms to the "Use when" clause — "code visualization", "architecture diagram", "code map", "CodeSee" — so the skill triggers on phrases users actually say.

Briefly state what CodeSee is (a codebase visualization tool) in the description itself, so the "what" is informative without relying on the body text.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The only capability statement is "Manage data, records, and automate workflows" — generic verb phrases with no concrete action (nothing about diagrams, codebase visualization, or any specific CodeSee capability). This matches the anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" ("Processes PDF files"); score 3 would require at least 1-2 concrete actions, which are absent.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both parts exist but the "what" is buzzword-level ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows") while the "when" is explicit yet circular ("Use when the user wants to interact with CodeSee data"). It sits between anchor 3 and anchor 4, landing at 3 because the vague, padded "what" falls short of anchor 4's expectation of an informative description; it is above anchor 2 because the "Use when" clause is explicitly present.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"CodeSee" is the only natural trigger term, repeated in "Use when the user wants to interact with CodeSee data"; common variations a user would naturally say — "codebase visualization", "architecture diagram", "code map", "onboarding" — are all missing. This matches "Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms"; not 4 because coverage is a single proper noun rather than good keyword coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The named product ("CodeSee integration... interact with CodeSee data") carves a distinct niche unlikely to trigger the wrong skill, matching "Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills". Not 5 because the generic phrases "Manage data, records, and automate workflows" create minor overlap risk with any data-management or workflow-automation skill.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

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/codesee/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.