Name: pitchlane
Rating: 52 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

Blog Docs Log in Get started

pitchlane

Pitchlane integration. Manage Organizations. Use when the user wants to interact with Pitchlane data.

Quality

57%

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/pitchlane/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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 solid, executable CLI integration guide with good command coverage and an explicit connection-readiness feedback loop. Its main weaknesses are mild prose padding, a broken Step 2 cross-reference with no destructive-operation validation, and an all-inlined single-file structure with no progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Fix or remove the dangling "skip to Step 2" reference (there is no Step 2 heading) and add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint before destructive proxy calls (e.g. confirm the method and target before running DELETE/PUT).

Tighten explanatory prose — drop the "so you can focus on integration logic" and "fastest way to get a connection" asides and trim rationale from the best-practices bullets to keep commands front and center.

Move the proxy flag table and the clientAction schema breakdown into a references/ file (e.g. REFERENCE.md) and link to it from the body, and include at least one concrete Pitchlane action example (e.g. listing/creating a Deal) to reach copy-paste-ready coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly task-oriented with executable commands, but includes unnecessary explanatory prose ("so you can focus on the integration logic rather than auth plumbing", "This is the fastest way to get a connection...", and rationale-laden best practices) that could be tightened, matching the mostly-efficient-but-could-be-tighter anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, copy-paste-ready commands are given throughout (install, login, connection ensure, action list/run, request) plus a complete proxy-flag table, but examples stay generic (CONNECTION_ID, <actionId> placeholders) with no concrete Pitchlane action demonstrated, leaving minor gaps versus a 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear install→auth→connect→poll→search→run sequence exists with an explicit state-feedback loop for connection readiness, but the "skip to Step 2" reference points to a non-existent Step 2 heading and destructive proxy operations (DELETE/PUT) have no validation checkpoint, triggering the destructive-operations cap at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-sectioned with clear headers but is a single ~140-line file with no bundle files and no offloaded references; content that could live separately (proxy flag table, clientAction schema details, best practices) is inlined, matching the some-structure-but-could-be-better-organized anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 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 covers both what and when and is anchored to a distinct product name, but it is thin on concrete capabilities and natural trigger synonyms. It reads as a minimal, slightly generic integration description rather than a comprehensive one.

Suggestions

Replace the generic "Manage Organizations" with the concrete entities Pitchlane exposes (Deal, Note, User) and a few specific verbs (create, update, list) to lift specificity.

Add natural trigger phrases users would say, e.g. "Use when the user wants to create sales video messages, manage deals/notes, or work with Pitchlane prospecting data."

Avoid the tautological trigger by naming concrete Pitchlane-centric scenarios (video outreach, deal/note management) instead of "interact with Pitchlane data".

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ("Pitchlane integration") and a single action ("Manage Organizations"), but the verb "Manage" is generic and only one entity-action is given, matching the anchor where actions are minimal or generic rather than the 1-2 concrete actions of a 3.	2 / 5
Completeness	It states both what ("Pitchlane integration. Manage Organizations.") and when ("Use when the user wants to interact with Pitchlane data"), but the when clause is somewhat tautological and could be more explicit with concrete trigger phrases, so it sits at 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The only natural keyword present is "Pitchlane" inside "Use when the user wants to interact with Pitchlane data"; relevant but missing common variations or synonyms (e.g. video messages, prospecting, sales videos) that users would actually say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Naming the specific SaaS product "Pitchlane" gives it a clear, distinct niche with low conflict risk, but the surrounding action language ("Manage Organizations", "interact with Pitchlane data") is generic, leaving minor overlap risk versus a 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/pitchlane/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 5 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.