CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-quality

Language-agnostic skill for authoring and reviewing code with low cognitive complexity, readability, and long-term maintainability. Covers guard clauses, single-responsibility functions, type-driven design (illegal states unrepresentable, branded primitives, discriminated unions), schema-first validation, single source of truth for union metadata, functional core + imperative shell, idempotency, and neighbour-pattern symmetry. Pairs with `tdd` for new code (rules apply in GREEN/REFACTOR). Stack-specific extensions live under `rules/stacks/<stack>/` (React, Next.js today; drop a subdirectory for any other language or framework). Use during PR review, after writing new code, in TDD GREEN/REFACTOR, or when asked to "improve quality", "make this readable", "reduce complexity", "deduplicate", "clean this up", or "/code-quality".

85

1.11x
Quality

91%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.11x

2 of 3 eval scenarios. Add 1 more for a full score.

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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.

A well-organized, highly actionable advisory skill body with strong mode dispatch and validation loops for the auto-apply mode. Its main weaknesses are redundant inline duplication of the bundle's quick-reference file and heavy reliance on `rules/` files that are absent from the evaluated bundle.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced `rules/*.md` files in the bundle (or remove/repair the ~30 dead links, e.g. `rules/procedure.md`, `rules/stacks/react/components.md`) so the 'When the code involves... | Load' navigation table actually resolves.

Replace the ~35-row inline Quick Reference table with a link to the existing `references/quick-reference.md`, keeping only the 5–8 highest-leverage rows in SKILL.md to cut duplicated context.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence (e.g. 'Comments rot; names get refactored with code', '0.1 + 0.2 !== 0.3') with no basic-concept padding, but the ~35-row Quick Reference table duplicates content that already ships in `references/quick-reference.md`, and the four modes are described twice (mode list plus Procedure section).

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is highly concrete for an instruction-only skill: specific refactor targets ('One `Record<Status, { label, color, icon }>`', '`type User = z.infer<typeof UserSchema>`'), quantified thresholds (50+ lines, 4+ params, debounce ~1000 ms), exact invocations ('`Skill("code-quality", "plan")`', 'confidence ≥ 90 %'), and an explicit mode-dispatch rule from `$ARGUMENTS`.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The four modes are clearly sequenced with an explicit dispatch rule ('Detect the mode from the `$ARGUMENTS` first token ... default is authoring'), and simplify mode has real feedback loops ('apply one recipe at a time behind `Skill("confidence", "code") ≥ 90 %` and a scoped fast-check, reverting on failure'). The detailed 13-step authoring and 8-step review checklists are deferred to `rules/procedure.md` rather than stated inline, leaving minor validation gaps in the body itself.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Signaling and one-level-deep organization are good (per-topic 'When the code involves... | Load' tables), but the body references ~30 `rules/*.md` paths (control-flow.md, stacks/react/components.md, procedure.md, etc.) that do not exist in the bundle — only `references/citations.md` and `references/quick-reference.md` are present — so navigation dead-ends. Additionally `references/quick-reference.md` is never linked from the body while its content is inlined, which is structure that should be separate.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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 strong description: third-person, specific, comprehensive, and explicit about both capabilities and trigger conditions, with clear boundary-setting against companion skills. The only minor risk is overlap on generic quality-improvement triggers with closely related refactoring skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates concrete, specific capabilities comprehensively: 'authoring and reviewing code', 'guard clauses, single-responsibility functions, type-driven design (illegal states unrepresentable, branded primitives, discriminated unions), schema-first validation, single source of truth for union metadata, functional core + imperative shell, idempotency'. This matches the comprehensive-coverage anchor; the 4 anchor's 'minor gaps in coverage' does not apply.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: 'what' via the enumerated capability list and 'when' via the concrete 'Use during PR review, after writing new code, in TDD GREEN/REFACTOR, or when asked to...' clause with trigger phrases — the anchor-5 pattern.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasing is covered with synonyms: '"improve quality", "make this readable", "reduce complexity", "deduplicate", "clean this up", or "/code-quality"', plus situational triggers 'Use during PR review, after writing new code, in TDD GREEN/REFACTOR'. Matches the comprehensive natural-terms anchor including the slash-command variant.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche ('low cognitive complexity, readability, and long-term maintainability') is distinct and it explicitly boundaries itself against neighbors ('Pairs with `tdd` for new code', 'Accessibility lives in `ux`, not here — this skill defers'). However, broad triggers like '"improve quality"' or '"clean this up"' carry minor overlap risk with closely related refactor/simplify skills, fitting the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' anchor rather than minimal-conflict 5.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 7 missing

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
mthines/agent-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.