CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-review-change-size

Change size guidance (800 lines)

52

Quality

57%

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 ./.codex/skills/code-review-change-size/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 lean, actionable rule set with concrete size thresholds and a clear conditional staging directive, appropriately self-contained for a micro-skill. Its only gap is the absence of a worked staging example to make the guidance fully copy-paste-ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Four sentences with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows (diffs, dependencies, call sites); every token earns its place, matching the score-5 "lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence" anchor. It is not below 5 because nothing is superfluous.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete thresholds (800/500 lines) and a concrete staging directive ("identify the smallest coherent stage to land first", "base on the actual diff, dependencies, and affected call sites") give mostly executable guidance, but no worked example of staging a real diff, matching score 4. It is not 5 because the staging step lacks a copy-paste-ready example.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The rule and its conditional branch (exceed limit → propose split, identify smallest stage) are clear and unambiguous for an advisory skill; no validation checkpoint is required because the operation is non-destructive. It is not 5 because the staging sub-workflow is described abstractly rather than as an explicit sequenced/checkpointed process.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a self-contained micro-skill (well under 50 lines, no bundle files, no external content to disclose), so the simple-skill exception applies and progressive disclosure is satisfied without file references or heavy sectioning. It is not below 5 because there is nothing that belongs in a separate file.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

28%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 a terse label rather than a capability statement: it names the domain and a threshold but states no actions and provides no trigger guidance. It is lean but underspecified for discovery.

Suggestions

Rewrite as a capability + trigger sentence, e.g. "Checks whether a code change is too large to review in one pass; use when reviewing a PR, sizing a diff, or deciding whether to split changes into stages."

Add an explicit "Use when…" clause so Claude knows when to invoke the skill.

Surface the concrete thresholds (800/500 lines) and the staging action in the description to improve specificity and trigger quality.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Change size guidance (800 lines)" names the domain (change size) and a concrete number, but describes no actions — matching the score-2 anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" like "Processes PDF files". It is not score 1 because it is not purely abstract, and not score 3 because no concrete capability is stated.

2 / 5

Completeness

It gives a vague "what" ("guidance") with no "when"/"Use when…" clause at all, matching score 2 (vague what, no when). It cannot reach 3 because the what is not clear and the when is entirely missing rather than weakly implied.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The terms "change size" and "lines" are only loosely what a user would say; natural phrasings like "this PR is too big", "split the diff", or "reviewable chunks" are absent. It sits at score 2 (one or two generic keywords, missing the natural phrases) rather than 3, which would require clearly relevant keywords.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Change size guidance" carves a recognizable niche but would overlap with general code-review or PR-review skills, matching score 3 (somewhat specific but could still overlap). It is not 4 because the trigger is not distinct enough to rule out closely related review skills.

3 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
openai/codex
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.