CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

add-dashboard

Add a monitoring dashboard to NanoClaw. Installs @nanoco/nanoclaw-dashboard and a pusher that sends periodic JSON snapshots.

62

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/add-dashboard/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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 tightly written, fully actionable runbook with explicit validation and feedback loops at each stage, and its resource references are clearly signaled one level deep. The only drag is minor over-explanation in two rationale paragraphs and some reference-style content kept inline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with concrete commands and a tight architecture diagram, but the build-before-tests rationale and the colocation justification in step 3 are minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed. Not 5 because not every token earns its place; not 3 because the explanations are largely justified rather than unnecessary.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every step provides copy-paste-ready, executable commands (pnpm install, file-copy mapping, the index.ts edit block, a secret-generation one-liner, build/test/restart, curl verification, removal commands). Fully executable with common cases covered.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Six numbered steps are clearly sequenced with explicit validation (build guards the dependency, vitest checks behavior + wiring, curl smoke-check confirms the dashboard is live) and a feedback loop (build fails with TS2307 -> redo step 4). Meets anchor 5 rather than 4 because checkpoints and error recovery are explicit.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear section headers and a well-signaled one-level-deep resource mapping in step 2 (three files with explicit src/ destinations); logic is split into dashboard-pusher.ts rather than inlined. Not 5 because the Dashboard Pages table and Troubleshooting are reference-style content kept inline, and no bundle reference directory is provided to verify the referenced resource paths.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 is concrete and clearly scoped to a distinct NanoClaw niche, but it lacks any 'when to use' trigger guidance and offers limited keyword variation. Completeness is the main weakness, capped at 3 by the missing trigger clause.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when adding monitoring or observability to a NanoClaw deployment, or when the user asks for a dashboard, metrics, or status view.'

Broaden natural trigger terms with synonyms like 'observability', 'metrics', 'status page', or 'token usage' to improve keyword coverage.

Optionally note the pusher cadence (e.g. '60s snapshots, 2s logs') only if it aids triggering; otherwise keep the action list as-is.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('monitoring dashboard to NanoClaw') and two concrete actions ('Installs @nanoco/nanoclaw-dashboard' and 'a pusher that sends periodic JSON snapshots'), but coverage is not comprehensive. Fits anchor 3 rather than 4, which requires several specific actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (add dashboard; install package + pusher) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guidelines. Not 4 because 'when' is entirely absent rather than weakly present.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'monitoring dashboard' is a natural phrase a user would say, but coverage is thin with no synonyms or variations (e.g. observability, metrics, status page). Fits anchor 3 (some relevant keywords, missing common variations) better than 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to a specific product (NanoClaw) and a named package (@nanoco/nanoclaw-dashboard), giving a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk. Clearly above anchor 4, which only requires 'mostly distinct'.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
nanocoai/nanoclaw
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.