build-zoom-team-chat-app

Use when building Team Chat.

Quality

48%

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 ./plugins/zoom/skills/team-chat/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%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 concise, well-sequenced overview that correctly delegates detail to references, but it lacks executable specifics and explicit validation checkpoints, and several referenced bundle files are missing. Strengthening actionability and fixing broken reference links would raise quality notably.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable detail for at least the highest-value steps (e.g. sample OAuth token-exchange call, webhook signature-verification snippet, or example message-card payload) rather than only naming concepts.

Add an explicit validation/checklist step (e.g. 'Verify scopes and bot installation before sending; retry on invalid-token errors') to introduce a feedback loop for the OAuth/webhook operations.

Fix the References section: either create the missing files (concepts/api-selection.md, concepts/message-structure.md, examples/chatbot-setup.md, troubleshooting/common-issues.md) or point to the references/ files that actually exist (api-reference.md, environment-variables.md, error-codes.md, etc.).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (terse workflow steps, no padding about what Zoom or OAuth is); it is not 5 because the opening line restates the frontmatter description and a few phrases could be trimmed further.	4 / 5
Actionability	Steps name concrete concepts (Team Chat API vs Chatbot API, JID formats, signature verification) but provide no executable code, commands, or specific steps, fitting the score-3 anchor ('Some concrete guidance but incomplete... missing key details'); it is not 4 because nothing is copy-paste ready or specific enough to execute directly.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear six-step sequence is present but validation checkpoints and feedback loops are absent, and the skill involves OAuth/webhook handling where missing validation caps the score at 3 per the rubric; it is not 2 because the sequence itself is coherent and well-ordered.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is structured as an overview with a one-level-deep References section, but 4 of the 7 referenced paths (concepts/api-selection.md, concepts/message-structure.md, examples/chatbot-setup.md, troubleshooting/common-issues.md) do not exist in the bundle, breaking navigation; this fits score-3 ('could be better organized; references present but not clearly signaled') rather than 4 because the broken links prevent reliable discovery.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

40%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 provides a clear trigger ('Use when building Team Chat') but omits any statement of what the skill actually does, leaving it terse and capability-free. Distinctiveness is reasonable thanks to the specific product surface, though it would benefit from explicit 'Zoom' qualification.

Suggestions

Add a 'what' clause listing concrete capabilities, e.g. 'Build Zoom Team Chat integrations — user-scoped messaging, chatbots, message cards, and webhook automations. Use when building for Zoom Team Chat.'

Include natural trigger synonyms like 'Zoom Team Chat', 'ZTC', and 'Zoom chatbot' to improve keyword coverage.

Qualify the surface as 'Zoom Team Chat' to reduce overlap ambiguity with other team-chat products.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description "Use when building Team Chat." names the domain but states no concrete actions, matching the score-2 anchor ("Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic"); it does not reach 3 because there are zero concrete capabilities listed.	2 / 5
Completeness	Only a 'when' ("Use when building Team Chat") is present with no 'what' describing capabilities, matching the score-2 anchor ("only 'when' is present without 'what'"); it cannot be 3 because a clear 'what' is entirely absent.	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"building Team Chat" includes one relevant natural keyword but misses common variations/synonyms (e.g. "Zoom Team Chat", "ZTC", "chatbot"), fitting the score-3 anchor; it is not 4 because keyword coverage is thin rather than 'good'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Team Chat" is a fairly distinct Zoom surface with limited overlap risk, fitting the score-4 anchor; it is not 5 because the bare term "Team Chat" (without "Zoom") could ambiguously overlap with other team-chat products.	4 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 4 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: openai/plugins
Path: plugins/zoom/skills/team-chat/SKILL.md
Commit: 1e28582

Reviewed: 7 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.