Name: sonarqube
Rating: 57.599999999999994 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

sonarqube

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

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

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

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 highly actionable with concrete Membrane CLI commands and a well-structured connection state machine including validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are an unnecessary concept-explaining intro, a duplicated command, and an undefined "Step 2" cross-reference.

Suggestions

Cut the introductory paragraph explaining what SonarQube is and remove the duplicate action-list command in "Popular actions" to tighten token usage.

Define or relabel the "Step 2" target referenced by the connection workflow (e.g., add a "## Step 2: Run actions" heading) so the cross-reference resolves.

Add one fully-resolved end-to-end example with concrete values (a real action id and connection id) so the action-run flow is copy-paste ready without placeholders.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The intro paragraph explains what SonarQube is ("open-source platform for continuous inspection of code quality... identify bugs, vulnerabilities, and code smells") which Claude already knows, and "Popular actions" repeats the earlier action-list command, adding padding that could be trimmed.	3 / 5
Actionability	It provides concrete, copy-paste-ready CLI commands with real flags (login, connection ensure, action run, request) and a proxy-flags table; minor gaps remain in that examples rely on placeholders like <actionId> and CONNECTION_ID without a single fully-resolved end-to-end example.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The connection workflow is well-sequenced with explicit state-based validation and a polling feedback loop (BUILDING -> poll --wait -> CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED -> re-poll), but it references "Step 2" without ever labeling that step, leaving a navigation gap.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist, but the body is organized into clearly headed sections (Install, Authentication, Connecting, Searching, Running actions, Proxy, Best practices) appropriate for a CLI-wrapper skill, with only minor content that could be split out.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 cleanly answers both what the skill does and when to use it in third person, and the SonarQube niche makes it highly distinct. Its weakness is generic action wording and limited trigger-term coverage that omits the natural vocabulary users associate with SonarQube.

Suggestions

Replace generic verbs ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows") with SonarQube-specific capabilities such as inspecting projects, reviewing issues and rules, and checking quality gates.

Broaden the trigger clause to include natural phrases users actually say, e.g. "Use when the user wants to check code quality, review SonarQube issues, or inspect quality gates and rules."

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the SonarQube domain and a couple of actions ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows"), but those actions are generic rather than SonarQube-specific (no mention of projects, issues, rules, or quality gates), so coverage is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	It has both a clear "what" ("SonarQube integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows.") and an explicit "when" ("Use when the user wants to interact with SonarQube data."), though the trigger clause is somewhat generic rather than enumerating concrete triggers.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"SonarQube" and "interact with SonarQube data" are relevant terms, but common natural variations a user would say (code quality, issues, quality gate, vulnerabilities) are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	SonarQube is a specific named platform, giving it a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk with other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 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/sonarqube/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 4 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.