code-explainer

**UTILITY SKILL** - Explain code snippets, functions, and algorithms in plain language. USE FOR: explain code, what does this code do, break down this function, help me understand this, walk through this algorithm, clarify this logic, explain this snippet, describe what happens here. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new code (use code generation), fixing bugs (use debugging), refactoring (use refactoring skills), code review with action items. INVOKES: file reading tools to access code, language detection for tailored explanations. FOR SINGLE OPERATIONS: If the user just needs to see file contents, use file reading tools directly.

Quality

62%

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 ./examples/code-explainer/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

35%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 well-organized and friendly but over-explains concepts Claude already knows and offers a response template rather than executable, tool-driven guidance, with no progressive file structure. Tightening the prose and moving examples to a reference file would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the language-specific tips table and the worked example explanations of recursion/async-await; assume Claude knows these and keep only the explanation structure and any non-obvious guidance.

Replace the abstract response template with concrete, actionable steps (e.g., which file-reading tool to call, how to detect language, how to structure the output) so the skill drives behavior rather than describing it.

Move the full worked examples into a referenced file (e.g., examples.md) and keep only a short pointer in SKILL.md to apply progressive disclosure and reduce token load.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body re-states material Claude already knows (what recursion/async-await are, language-specific tip tables for Python/JS/SQL/Java) and pads the explanation with generic advice, adding length without proportional signal.	2 / 5
Actionability	It gives a high-level response template (Overview / Step-by-step / Key concepts / Example) but no executable commands, no tools to invoke, and no concrete procedure beyond illustrative example answers.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The four-part structure outlines a loose sequence for producing an explanation, but there are no validation checkpoints; while this is a read-only explanation task, the steps remain implicit and template-only.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill has no bundle files yet the body inlines example walkthroughs and a language-tips table that are candidates for separate reference material; internal section structure is present but references are not used.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

90%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.

A well-structured, trigger-rich description that clearly states capabilities, natural-language use cases, and negative boundaries in third person. Minor additional distinctiveness could be gained by sharpening the niche versus generic documentation skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names concrete actions ('Explain code snippets, functions, and algorithms in plain language') and lists multiple specific USE FOR triggers, with only minor coverage gaps (e.g., no mention of scripts or config files).	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both 'what' ('Explain code snippets, functions, and algorithms in plain language') and 'when' (USE FOR triggers plus a FOR SINGLE OPERATIONS guard clause) with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes a comprehensive set of natural phrases users would actually say ('explain code', 'what does this code do', 'walk through this algorithm', 'help me understand this') plus clear DO NOT USE FOR boundaries.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The DO NOT USE FOR clause explicitly disambiguates from code generation, debugging, refactoring, and code review, leaving only minor overlap risk with general documentation skills.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 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: examples/code-explainer/SKILL.md
Commit: 611250c

Reviewed: 17 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.