CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

reference-design-contract

Turn vague taste, screenshots, URLs, product notes, or "make it feel like this" references into a grounded DESIGN.md plus an implementation handoff. Use it before prototypes, decks, redesigns, or image remix work when the user needs a reusable visual direction rather than a one-off prompt.

72

Quality

91%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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.

A well-structured instruction-only skill: the workflow is explicit and ends in a real validation gate backed by an existing one-level-deep checklist reference, and the guidance is concrete down to exact headings and file names. The only weakness is mild redundancy between the opening paragraph and the frontmatter description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, assumes Claude's competence, and explains nothing the model already knows; the guidance like "Prefer concrete constraints over adjectives: 'one warm accent, no purple or blue glow' beats 'premium'" earns its tokens. However, the opening paragraph ("The goal is not to write a longer prompt. The goal is to make design decisions explicit enough...") partially restates the frontmatter description and could be trimmed, so it is not the every-token-counts case of a 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is fully concrete: exact file names (DESIGN.md, design-contract.md, implementation-handoff.md), the exact nine section headings to use, a three-way Keep/Change/Do-not-copy split with concrete examples per bucket, and a confidence taxonomy (observed, provided, inferred). No key execution detail is left abstract.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced and ends with an explicit validation checkpoint ("Validate. Read references/checklist.md and satisfy every P0 gate before final handoff"), and the referenced checklist supplies the feedback loop ("If any of those answers are missing, revise the contract before handing off") plus a concrete P0 checklist. A score of 4 would require a missing or only implicit checkpoint, which is not the case.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-organized ~75-line overview that pushes validation detail to exactly one clearly-signaled, one-level-deep reference (references/checklist.md, which exists in the bundle and is named with its path in workflow step 8), with no nested references and no bulk content inlined that belongs in a separate file.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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.

A strong description that explicitly covers both what the skill does and when to use it, with concrete input/output names and natural trigger phrasing. Minor gaps: a few common synonyms (style guide, moodboard, design system) are missing, and the action list is a single transformation rather than several distinct capabilities.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names concrete inputs ("screenshots, URLs, product notes") and concrete outputs ("a grounded DESIGN.md plus an implementation handoff"), which is more than the 1-2 actions of a score-3 anchor, but it describes essentially one transformation rather than the multiple distinct actions of a score-5 anchor (e.g., extract, fill, merge, convert).

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ("Turn ... references into a grounded DESIGN.md plus an implementation handoff") and when ("Use it before prototypes, decks, redesigns, or image remix work when the user needs a reusable visual direction rather than a one-off prompt"), including a concrete quoted user phrase. A score of 4 would require the 'when' clause to be weaker or only implicit, which it is not.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasing is present — "make it feel like this", "redesigns", "image remix work", "visual direction" — giving good keyword coverage, but common synonyms users might say such as "design system", "style guide", or "moodboard" are absent, so it falls short of the comprehensive synonym coverage of a 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche (reference-to-design-contract conversion with specific deliverable names like DESIGN.md and implementation handoff) with triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. A score of 4 would imply meaningful overlap with a closely related skill such as a generic styling or design-system skill, which the specific deliverables and framing largely preclude.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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

Path

skills/reference-design-contract/SKILL.md

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.