Name: libraria
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

Blog Docs Log in Get started

libraria

Libraria integration. Manage Libraries. Use when the user wants to interact with Libraria data.

Quality

63%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/libraria/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

68%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 an efficient, largely executable guide to driving Libraria through the Membrane CLI, with clear setup and discovery flows. Its main gaps are the missing validation/confirmation step before destructive actions and action IDs not surfaced in the Popular actions table.

Suggestions

Add a validation/confirmation checkpoint before destructive actions, e.g. retrieve the document with get-document and confirm with the user before running delete-document.

Include the concrete ACTION_ID (or the exact `membrane action list` lookup) alongside each Popular actions row so `membrane action run` is copy-paste ready.

Trim the filler line "Use action names and parameters as needed." and tighten the SaaS intro to push conciseness toward a 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is command-driven and assumes Claude's competence, with only minor over-explanation such as "Libraria is a library management SaaS..." and the filler line "Use action names and parameters as needed.", fitting the score-4 anchor "Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed" rather than the fully lean score 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	It provides copy-paste-ready commands for install, login, connect, action discovery, and execution, but the Popular actions table lists human names and keys rather than the ACTION_IDs that `membrane action run` actually requires, leaving a minor gap that matches the score-4 anchor.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The install → login → connect → discover → run sequence is clearly laid out, but the skill exposes a destructive operation (delete-document) with no validation or confirmation checkpoint before running it, so the destructive/batch validation cap holds workflow clarity at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is organized into clearly labeled sections (Overview, Working with Libraria, Popular actions, Proxy, Best practices) with no nested references, but at over 50 lines and with no separate reference files for the action/flag tables it sits at score 4 rather than the reference-split score 5.	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 pairs a what and an explicit when-clause and names a distinct product, but its capability list is reduced to the generic verb "Manage Libraries" with limited trigger-term variety. Tightening the what with concrete operations and adding synonym triggers would lift specificity and completeness.

Suggestions

Replace the generic "Manage Libraries" with concrete operations, e.g. "Add, query, get, and delete documents in Libraria libraries."

Broaden trigger terms beyond the product name, e.g. "Use when the user wants to query a Libraria knowledge base, add or retrieve documents, or manage Libraria libraries."

Keep the explicit 'Use when...' clause but tie it to the specific actions listed so the when maps to concrete capabilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "Manage Libraries" names the domain but offers only a minimal, generic action with no concrete operations (e.g. add/query/delete documents), matching the score-2 anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" rather than the 1-2 concrete actions required for a 3.	2 / 5
Completeness	It states both a what ("Libraria integration. Manage Libraries.") and an explicit when ("Use when the user wants to interact with Libraria data"), so it clears the score-3 cap; the when is reasonably explicit while the what stays generic, matching the score-4 anchor rather than the fully concrete score-5 example.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces "Libraria", "Libraries", and "Libraria data" — relevant natural terms a user might say — but coverage is limited to the product name with no synonyms or variations, fitting the score-3 anchor "Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms."	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Libraria integration" names a specific product niche with low conflict risk, but the trigger term "Libraries" is generic enough to potentially overlap with other library-management skills, so it sits at score 4 ("Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk") rather than the minimal-conflict score 5.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
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/libraria/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 6 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.