provider-health

Starter: one-screen provider health summary — availability, auth method, version drift, and cost posture for every seatable provider

Quality

72%

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 ./skills/octopus-starter-pack/provider-health/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

86%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 tight, well-organized starter that gives Claude concrete commands, a clear sequence, and explicit guardrails without padding, scoring near the top across content dimensions; the only dip is actionability, since some execution relies on external plugin scripts rather than self-contained code.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — no padding, no explaining what providers or auth are — and every line (steps, output shape, guardrails) earns its place; the concrete specifics in step 2 are necessary detail, not verbosity.	5 / 5
Actionability	Concrete executable commands are given (exact script paths 'check-providers.sh'/'check-versions.sh', fix commands 'grok login', 'opencode auth login', key export) plus a precise table shape, but execution depends on external plugin scripts and a couple of fix steps are named rather than fully specified, leaving minor gaps.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Four steps are clearly sequenced (Detect → Summarize per provider → Flag ranked problems → State cost posture) and the Guardrails section acts as a checkpoint ('fails detection now is DOWN; do not soften it'), though there is no explicit validate-then-retry feedback loop.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a sub-50-line single-purpose skill with no need for bundle files (references/scripts/assets are absent) and clean, well-signaled sections (When to use, Steps, Output shape, Guardrails), satisfying the simple-skills exception for a top score.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 clearly conveys what the skill produces and is reasonably distinct, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance and leans on domain terms rather than natural user phrasing, capping completeness and trigger quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause naming the natural triggers already in the body (e.g. 'Use when the user asks what providers they have, a workflow shows (unavailable - skipping), or starting on a new machine').

Include common-sense synonyms a user would actually say (e.g. 'provider status', 'which providers are available') to lift trigger-term quality.

Reframe one or two facets as concrete actions (e.g. 'detects provider availability and auth method') to push specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and several concrete summary facets — 'availability, auth method, version drift, and cost posture' — giving specific output dimensions rather than vague language, though they describe contents more than discrete actions, leaving minor coverage gaps versus a fully comprehensive action list.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated (one-screen provider health summary with named facets), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant domain keywords ('availability', 'auth method', 'version drift', 'cost posture') are present, but the natural user phrasing ('what providers do I have?') lives in the body rather than the description, and common synonyms/variations are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is fairly distinct — 'provider health summary ... for every seatable provider' with Octopus-specific 'seatable' framing — leaving only minor overlap risk with closely related provider-management 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: nyldn/claude-octopus
Path: skills/octopus-starter-pack/provider-health/SKILL.md
Commit: 805d58c

Reviewed: 24 hours 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.