CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

codex-interactive-capability-map

Turn a long-form article, thread, memo, or product narrative into a compact clickable capability map with a workflow loop, use-case matrix, and responsive detail panel.

61

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/_official/examples/codex-interactive-capability-map/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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, lean, actionable prototype-generation spec with a clear workflow and a concrete output contract. Its only real gaps are a missing explicit verification step in the workflow and the absence of a starter HTML example.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and directive with no explaining of concepts Claude already knows; minor aesthetic flourishes ('soft liquid motion, glassy surfaces') could be trimmed, matching the 'efficient; minor instances' anchor rather than the fully minimal 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, specific guidance ('extract 6-10 core concepts', named three-view structure, exact artifact identifier, 1280px/<900px breakpoints) with a copy-paste output-contract wrapper; the absence of a full starter HTML example is a minor gap that keeps it below 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-step numbered sequence is present and the operation is non-destructive; the 'Interaction Requirements' and 'Output Contract' serve as a checklist, but there is no explicit validate/verify step in the workflow itself, matching the 4 anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a ~50-line single-file skill with no bundle files and five well-organized sections (Use When, Workflow, Visual Direction, Interaction Requirements, Output Contract); the simple-skill exception applies, so well-organized sections alone warrant a 5.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 specific and names a distinctive output format with concrete components, but it lacks any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which caps its completeness and slightly weakens distinctiveness. Adding a trigger clause would lift the two capped dimensions.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user wants to turn a long article, thread, or memo into an interactive clickable map rather than a static summary.'

Add common synonyms users might say ('blog post', 'essay', 'long document') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Clarify when NOT to use it (e.g. short Q&A, code-only tasks) to reduce overlap risk with general summarization skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and lists several concrete output components ('workflow loop, use-case matrix, and responsive detail panel'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not a 5 because it is a single transform action rather than comprehensive multi-action coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (transform text into a multi-view capability map) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural input terms users would say are present ('long-form article, thread, memo, or product narrative'); a few common synonyms (e.g. 'blog post', 'essay') are missing, so it sits at good-but-not-comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'clickable capability map' with three specific views is a distinct niche, but the missing explicit triggers leave minor overlap risk with general diagram/explainer skills, keeping it below the 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
nexu-io/open-design
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.