standup-summary

Tell Gemma what you did, what you're working on, and any blockers. Get a clean standup update.

Quality

58%

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/gemma/standup-summary/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is admirably concise and the single-action workflow is clear, but actionability and progressive disclosure suffer because the bundle files the skill relies on are never named or referenced. Adding the script path and a concrete data example would close the main gaps.

Suggestions

Name the entry script explicitly, e.g. 'Run scripts/index.html via run_js', so Claude knows which file to execute.

Add a concrete copy-paste JSON example for the data parameter showing all five fields populated.

Reference assets/webview.html as the rendered output so the bundle structure is signaled and navigable.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean: no concept explanations, well-chosen concrete examples, and direct instructions — every token earns its place and it assumes Claude's competence.	3 / 3
Actionability	It specifies the run_js tool and enumerates the data fields, but never names the script file to run (scripts/index.html) and provides no concrete JSON example to copy, leaving key execution details incomplete.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	As a simple single-action skill, the gather-input → call-run_js → render flow is unambiguous and well-organized with clear sections; no destructive or batch operation requires validation checkpoints.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is short and cleanly sectioned, but the bundle files (scripts/index.html, assets/webview.html) that the skill depends on are never referenced or signaled in the body, leaving no navigation path to the implementation.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

40%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 identifies a clear, relatable niche (standup updates) and names the key inputs, but it is written in second-person imperative voice, omits common trigger variations, and lacks an explicit 'Use when…' clause. These gaps leave it solid but unexceptional across all dimensions.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person, e.g. 'Formats a clean standup update from what you did, what you're working on, and any blockers.'

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when the user asks for a standup, daily update, Slack check-in, or status report.'

Include common trigger variations such as 'daily standup', 'Slack update', and 'team check-in' alongside 'standup' and 'blockers'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the standup domain and inputs ('what you did, what you're working on, and any blockers') plus the output ('clean standup update') but no comprehensive concrete capability actions; the second-person imperative voice ('Tell Gemma', 'Get') triggers the −1 voice penalty, dropping it from a base of 2 to 1.	1 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does ('Get a clean standup update') but provides no 'Use when…' or equivalent explicit trigger for when to invoke it, capping completeness at 2 per the guideline.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'standup update' and 'blockers' are natural terms a user would say, but common variations like 'daily standup', 'Slack update', or 'team check-in' (which appear in the body) are missing from the description.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The standup niche is fairly specific, but with no explicit distinct triggers it could still overlap with generic status-update or summary skills, so it does not reach a clear conflict-free 3.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: mergisi/awesome-openclaw-agents
Path: skills/gemma/standup-summary/SKILL.md
Commit: 05820c5

Reviewed: 8 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.