html-ppt-zhangzara-stencil-tablet

A workplace-safety compliance review for a manufacturing regulator — findings, the evidence chain, and the corrective mandate. Built as a decision-grade policy briefing deck for regulator, plant leadership.

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 ./design-templates/html-ppt-zhangzara-stencil-tablet/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%

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

The body is concise and cleanly organized into a sensible workflow, but its actionability and reference structure are undermined by missing bundle files (example.html, LICENSE, template.json) and by the absence of a verification checkpoint despite flagging a silent-break risk.

Suggestions

Ship example.html (and LICENSE / template.json) alongside the skill, or rewrite the workflow to not depend on files that are absent, so the "Clone example.html" step is actually executable.

Add an explicit verification step (e.g., open the artifact and confirm keyboard navigation works) to close the gap the skill itself flags about navigation silently breaking.

Resolve the broken file references in the Source & license section so progressive-disclosure navigation points only to files that exist.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and well-sectioned (At a glance, Best for, Avoid for, Workflow, Output contract) and assumes Claude's competence without explaining what HTML or a deck is; every section earns its place.	3 / 3
Actionability	Workflow steps are concrete ("Clone example.html AND the assets/ folder", "Replace placeholder content") and an output-contract snippet is provided, but the primary instruction references example.html which is not present in the bundle, so the central action is not executable as shipped.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Six numbered steps give a clear sequence, but there are no validation checkpoints even though step 1 warns navigation can "silently break" — a verification step to confirm the deck renders is missing.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are clearly organized and one referenced file exists (assets/deck-stage.js), but three of four referenced paths (example.html, LICENSE, template.json) are absent from the bundle, leaving the navigation partly broken.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

57%

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 clearly identifies a niche domain and audience but reads as a topic statement rather than a capability statement, and it omits any explicit "when to use" guidance. It is distinguishable but incomplete as a trigger surface.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete action verb (e.g., "Generates a decision-grade policy briefing deck...") so the skill's capability is explicit, not just its topic.

Add a "Use when..." clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g., compliance review, safety audit, regulator briefing) to satisfy the "when" half of completeness.

Include common keyword variations (safety audit, regulatory deck, compliance findings) to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("workplace-safety compliance review for a manufacturing regulator") and structural elements ("findings, the evidence chain, and the corrective mandate"), but describes the output topic rather than concrete skill actions; no verbs like generate, assemble, or render.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill produces ("Built as a decision-grade policy briefing deck") but has no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 2 per the rubric.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some natural terms a user might say ("compliance review", "policy briefing deck", "workplace safety") but misses common variations and phrasings; coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The scenario ("workplace-safety compliance review for a manufacturing regulator") carves a clear niche with distinct triggers, making it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: nexu-io/open-design
Path: design-templates/html-ppt-zhangzara-stencil-tablet/SKILL.md
Commit: f2760fd

Reviewed: 3 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.