code-explainer

Explains code snippets in plain English, breaking down what the code does step by step. Perfect for learning, code reviews, or documentation.

Quality

60%

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/code-explainer/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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 a well-structured, appropriately scoped instruction-only skill: a clear procedure, a concrete output template, and worked examples that make the expected behavior unambiguous. Its main weakness is moderate padding — the persona framing and Behavior Guidelines restate what Claude would do anyway.

Suggestions

Trim the persona line and Behavior Guidelines section, or compress them into the Instructions list, cutting phrases like "Always be educational and helpful" and "Keep explanations concise but complete" that add no actionable information.

Replace soft qualifiers ("If appropriate", "Use appropriate technical depth") with concrete decision criteria, e.g. when to include the Suggestions section or how to gauge depth for one-liners vs. multi-function snippets.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient, but pads with things Claude already knows: "You are a code explanation expert" framing and Behavior Guidelines like "Always be educational and helpful" / "Keep explanations concise but complete" add little, and the two full worked examples could be tightened. Anchor 3: mostly efficient with some unnecessary explanation that could be trimmed.	3 / 5
Actionability	The Output Format prescribes an exact structure ("Overview: A one-sentence summary", numbered Step-by-Step, Key Concepts) and two complete worked input→output examples, so Claude knows exactly what to produce; per the rubric's instruction-skill note, absence of code is not penalized. Not 5 because some guidance remains soft ("If appropriate", "Use appropriate technical depth") with no criteria for deciding.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear, ordered procedure (identify language → break down → highlight concepts → suggest improvements) is reinforced by an explicit output template and examples; it's a read-only explanation task so no validation checkpoints are required. Anchor 4: clear sequence with all applicable checkpoints present; not 5 because there is no guidance for edge cases like unknown languages or very long snippets.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A simple, single-purpose skill with well-organized sections (Instructions, Output Format, Examples, Behavior Guidelines), no nested or buried references, and no content that belongs in separate bundle files — no bundle files exist and none are needed. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, well-organized sections alone merit a 5 here.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

50%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 communicates a clear core capability (plain-English, step-by-step code explanation) but is generic and reads partly as marketing copy. It lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and natural trigger variations, capping completeness and trigger-term quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user shares a code snippet and asks what it does, wants it explained, or is learning an unfamiliar language or function."

Replace "Perfect for learning, code reviews, or documentation" with concrete capability statements and natural trigger phrases users would actually say ("what does this code do", "walk me through this function", "explain this snippet").

Sharpen distinctiveness by scoping the trigger away from code review / documentation skills, e.g. "For explaining how code works; use code-review or documentation skills for reviewing or writing it."

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Explains code snippets in plain English, breaking down what the code does step by step" names the domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but adds nothing further; "Perfect for learning..." is promotional fluff rather than capability description. It lists fewer specific actions than anchor 4 but is more concrete than a bare domain mention (anchor 2).	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (explain code in plain English, step by step), but there is no "Use when..." clause — the "when" is only weakly implied by "Perfect for learning, code reviews, or documentation", which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. Not 4 because the usage contexts are marketing framing, not explicit trigger guidance.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"code snippets", "code reviews", and "explain" are natural user terms, but common trigger phrasings are missing ("what does this code do", "walk me through this", language names, "understand this function"). Matches anchor 3: some relevant keywords, missing common variations.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Explains code snippets" carves out a recognizable niche but overlaps with code review, documentation-generation, and tutoring skills, and "documentation" as a use case invites overlap. Anchor 3: somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills; lacks the distinct triggers of anchor 4.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 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: microsoft/waza
Path: skills/code-explainer/SKILL.md
Commit: 1234308

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.