Name: netalertx-code-standards
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: netalertx

Blog Docs Log in Get started

netalertx-code-standards

NetAlertX coding standards and conventions. Use this when writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features.

Quality

61%

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 ./.github/skills/code-standards/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

61%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, highly actionable conventions reference with concrete code throughout. Its main weaknesses are a redundant top-level bullet list that duplicates the detailed sections and the absence of validation-gated workflow checkpoints.

Suggestions

Remove or condense the opening bullet list so each rule lives in only one place; let the section headers serve as the index.

Add an explicit validation/checklist step for DB writes and subprocess calls (e.g. 'run the test suite and verify MAC normalization before marking the step done').

Consider moving the longer guidance blocks (Docstrings, Language Strings) into referenced files to lift progressive disclosure and reduce inline length.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Sections are mostly lean with executable code, but the opening ~22-bullet list restates rules that are each expanded again in dedicated sections below (File Length, DRY, Database Access, MAC handling, Subprocess, Time, Docstrings, Language Strings, Path Hygiene, Test Helpers), creating noticeable redundancy. It is above 2 because the section bodies themselves are efficient, but below 4 due to the duplicated top-level list.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides multiple concrete, executable snippets (normalize_mac, subprocess.run with timeout, timeNowUTC, grep commands, db_test_helpers imports, make_device_dict lowercase examples) covering common cases. It does not reach 5 because several rules remain statements without an accompanying example, leaving minor gaps.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough process sequence appears in the AI-only bullets ('prepare implementation plan', 'ask me to review', 'add test creation as last step'), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops for the destructive/DB/subprocess operations the skill governs. Per the destructive/batch cap, this cannot exceed 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clearly headed sections with well-signaled internal cross-references ('see Docstrings section below', 'see `testing-workflow` skill'). There are no bundle files to link to, and the structure is one level deep; it does not reach 5 because some inline material (e.g. docstring and language-string guidance) is sizable and could be split into referenced files.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 cleanly states both what the skill covers and when to use it, and the NetAlertX scoping keeps it distinct. Its main weakness is generic action/trigger language that lacks concrete, varied terms.

Suggestions

Replace generic verbs with more concrete capabilities, e.g. 'Enforces NetAlertX conventions for DB access, MAC normalization, subprocess timeouts, and UTC timestamps.'

Add natural trigger synonyms users might say (e.g. 'contributing to NetAlertX', 'NetAlertX PR', 'NetAlertX plugin') to broaden trigger coverage.

Tighten the 'when' clause to reference the project explicitly so it triggers only for NetAlertX work.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('NetAlertX coding standards and conventions') and a few actions ('writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features'), but the actions are generic and not comprehensive. It does not reach 4 because the actions lack concrete specificity, and stays above 2 because a domain plus multiple named actions is present.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' ('NetAlertX coding standards and conventions') and 'when' ('Use this when writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features') are explicitly present with concrete trigger phrases. It does not reach 5 because the 'when' triggers are somewhat generic rather than richly specific.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features' are reasonably natural phrases a user might say, but coverage is generic and lacks synonyms or more specific variations. It is above 2 (more than one relevant keyword) but below 4 (no broader/alternative natural terms).	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoping to 'NetAlertX' gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against non-NetAlertX skills. It does not reach 5 because the trigger verbs (writing/reviewing/implementing code) are broad and could overlap with other generic coding skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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: netalertx/NetAlertX
Path: .github/skills/code-standards/SKILL.md
Commit: 014b960

Reviewed: 5 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.