Name: netalertx-code-standards
Rating: 58.4 (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

66%

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

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable with specific paths, functions, and executable examples, but it suffers from redundant restating of rules between the bullet list and sectioned subsections, lacks validation checkpoints in its loose workflow, and is monolithic with no progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Eliminate the duplication between the opening bullet list and the headed sections: keep rules in one place and cross-reference rather than restating.

Add explicit validation/verification steps for risky operations (e.g., 'after normalize_mac, assert the result matches the expected format' or a pre-PR backward-compatibility check) to add feedback loops.

Split the larger convention groups (DB access, test helpers) into reference files and link to them from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean imperative rules, but the opening bullet list duplicates nearly every rule later expanded under headed sections (File Length, DRY, Database Access, MAC Handling, Subprocess Safety, Test Helpers, Path Hygiene), and emphatic lines like 'SINGLE SOURCE OF TRUTH' add padding, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'.	2 / 3
Actionability	Guidance is concrete and copy-paste ready: real module paths (server/db/db_helper.py), named functions (normalize_mac, timeNowUTC, get_table_json), executable code blocks with imports, and specific thresholds (500 LOC, timeout=60), matching 'fully executable code/commands; copy-paste ready'.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A loose sequence exists (plan -> review -> implement -> test), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints for risky DB/subprocess operations and no validate-fix-retry feedback loops, capping it at 'steps listed but validation gaps'.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clear headed sections but lives in a single ~100-line monolithic SKILL.md with no external references or navigation, fitting 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline'.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 well-formed with an explicit 'Use this when' trigger and project-specific scoping, but its action verbs are generic and it lacks the concrete, distinctive capability detail of top-tier descriptions.

Suggestions

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

Add distinctive trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'NetAlertX PR', 'db_helper', or 'device_instance model', to reduce overlap with generic coding skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('coding standards and conventions') and some actions ('writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features') but the verbs are generic rather than multiple specific concrete capabilities, matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what ('NetAlertX coding standards and conventions') and an explicit when trigger ('Use this when writing code, reviewing code, or implementing features'), clearly answering both what and when.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Phrases like 'writing code', 'reviewing code', and 'implementing features' are natural user terms, but coverage is thin and missing common variations, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The NetAlertX project scoping gives it a niche, but the trigger verbs (writing/reviewing/implementing code) are broad and could overlap with generic coding skills, matching 'somewhat specific but could still overlap'.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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: 20ddf48

Reviewed: 7 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.