gog-docs

Google Docs operations through gog.

Quality

54%

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 ./.agents/skills/gog-docs/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

68%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 CLI wrapper with a strong safe-start sequence and a complete command catalog, assuming Claude's competence throughout. Its main weakness is workflow clarity for destructive operations, which lack an explicit post-write validation/feedback loop.

Suggestions

Add a short write/edit workflow with an explicit validate-after-write step (e.g., re-cat or schema-check the document and retry on error) to satisfy the destructive-operation feedback-loop expectation.

Consider moving the full command catalog to a references file and keeping a curated subset inline, which would tighten conciseness and improve progressive disclosure.

Provide one end-to-end worked example (e.g., read → edit → verify) so the safe-start pattern extends visibly to mutating operations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean: no explanations of what Google Docs is, a brief safe-start block, and a compact command table where each row earns its place. It assumes Claude's competence throughout, with only minor bulk from the long command catalog keeping it off a 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	The safe-start block gives copy-paste-ready executable bash commands (auth check, schema fetch, read a doc) and the table enumerates every command with its purpose. Placeholders like user@example.com and DOCUMENT_ID are minor gaps that keep it just short of fully copy-paste complete.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The skill is destructive-capable (delete, clear, write) and provides pre-write checkpoints (--readonly, --dry-run, confirm account/object/mutation) but no post-write validate-then-fix feedback loop. Per the destructive-operations cap, missing verification keeps this at 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is organized into clear sections (Safe start, Commands) with one-level-deep signaled references (../gog/SKILL.md, --help, schema). No bundle files exist; the main gap is the large inline command table that could live in a separate reference, keeping it off a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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 is correctly scoped to a distinct niche but is too terse: it names the domain and tool without listing concrete actions or any use-when trigger guidance. Adding specific operations and an explicit trigger clause would materially raise completeness and specificity.

Suggestions

List 2-4 concrete operations (e.g., read, edit, find-replace, insert tables/images) instead of the generic word "operations".

Add a "Use when..." clause naming natural triggers (e.g., when the user mentions Google Docs, Docs, or editing a Google Doc).

Include common synonyms or file references (Docs, Google Doc, .gdoc) to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ("Google Docs") and the tool ("gog") but lists no concrete actions — "operations" is generic. It is above a 1 because it does name a specific domain, but below a 3 because no concrete actions are enumerated.	2 / 5
Completeness	It offers a vague "what" ("operations") and no "when"/Use-when clause at all, matching the 'vague what and no when' anchor. The missing-trigger cap at 3 is respected, and it is not a 3 because the what is not clearly stated.	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Google Docs" is a natural keyword users would say, but no synonyms (Docs, Google Doc), file extensions, or variation phrases are present. It matches the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor, short of a 4 which needs broader coverage.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoped specifically to Google Docs via the named tool "gog", giving a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against sibling Google Workspace skills. It is not a 5 because it lacks explicit trigger phrases that would fully de-risk conflicts.	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
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: openclaw/gogcli
Path: .agents/skills/gog-docs/SKILL.md
Commit: eb85a99

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.