CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

sap-c4c

SAP C4C integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows. Use when the user wants to interact with SAP C4C data.

53

Quality

60%

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/sap-c4c/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body delivers concrete, executable Membrane CLI guidance for connecting to and acting on SAP C4C, with a reasonable connection-state feedback loop. Its main weaknesses are an oversized inlined entity list that hurts conciseness and progressive disclosure, plus missing validation steps and incoherent step numbering in the workflow.

Suggestions

Move the entity/object list into a separate references file (e.g. references/objects.md) and link to it, keeping only the most common objects inline.

Fix step numbering (label 'Step 1' explicitly or drop the 'Step 2' reference) so the workflow sequence is unambiguous.

Add a verification step after running write actions, e.g. re-query the record or check the action's output/errors before reporting success to the user.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

CLI command sections are efficient, but the ~80-line entity list (each object repeated with an 'Attachment' sub-bullet) and the CRM concept intro are padded low-value content that could be trimmed or moved.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready membrane commands (login, connection ensure, action list/run, request) with --json flags and an options table, with only minor placeholder gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The install→login→connect→poll→search→run sequence has a state-feedback polling loop, but step numbering is incoherent ('Step 2' with no Step 1) and running actions on live CRM data has no validation checkpoint, capping this per the destructive/batch rule.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Section headers provide structure, but it is a single monolithic file with no bundle references, and the large entity list and CLI reference are inlined rather than split into separate files.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 clearly identifies the SAP C4C niche and provides an explicit 'Use when' trigger, satisfying both the what and when. It is held back by generic action language ('manage data, records, automate workflows') and a lack of trigger-term synonyms.

Suggestions

Replace generic verbs with concrete actions, e.g. 'Create and update tickets, opportunities, and accounts; sync contacts; automate service workflows.'

Add natural trigger synonyms a user might say, such as 'SAP Cloud for Customer', 'SAP C4C', or 'SAP Cloud for Service'.

Tighten the 'when' clause with concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions SAP C4C, SAP Cloud for Customer, tickets, opportunities, or C4C records.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the SAP C4C domain and a couple of actions ('Manage data, records, and automate workflows'), but the actions are generic and not a comprehensive concrete list.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both a 'what' ('Manage data, records, and automate workflows') and an explicit 'when' ('Use when the user wants to interact with SAP C4C data') are present, though the 'what' is somewhat vague.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes the natural term 'SAP C4C' and 'interact with SAP C4C data', but lacks synonyms or common variations a user might say.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'SAP C4C' is a clear, specific niche with minimal conflict risk, though the generic data/records/workflow phrasing creates minor overlap with broader skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.

Validation15 / 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
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.