gog-groups

Google Groups operations through gog.

Quality

69%

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-groups/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 strong, terse CLI skill: executable safe-start commands, a clean command table, safety rules for account selection and writes, and explicit pointers to machine-readable contracts instead of duplicating flag documentation. The only real gaps are the absence of a worked example for the two listed commands and of any error-recovery guidance.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~35-line body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: every line is either an executable command, a flag rule, or a navigation pointer, with no concept explanations or padding. It matches 'Lean and efficient; every token earns its place'.	5 / 5
Actionability	The Safe start block gives three copy-paste-ready commands and the body directs to `--help` and `gog schema groups <command> --json` for exact syntax, which is mostly executable guidance. It stops short of 5 because there is no example invocation of the actual operations (e.g., `gog groups list --json --wrap-untrusted`), leaving a minor gap.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear sequence is present: read the shared gog SKILL.md first, run the auth/schema safe-start checks, then run commands per the table, with checkpoints like `--check`, `--readonly`, `--dry-run`, and confirm-before-write. It is not 5 because there are no error-recovery/feedback loops (e.g., what to do when the auth check fails) — only minor validation gaps, matching the score-4 anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is under 50 lines, well-sectioned (Safe start, Commands), and its single external reference (`../gog/SKILL.md` for shared rules) is clearly signaled and exactly one level deep. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, this matches the top anchor: clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references and easy navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 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 names its domain and tool cleanly and is appropriately concise, but it specifies no concrete operations and entirely lacks trigger guidance ('use when...'). It reads more like a label than a capability description, which limits both completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks about Google Groups, group members, or mailing lists they belong to."

Enumerate the concrete operations in the description ("List Google Groups you belong to and list members of a group"), mirroring the Commands table in the body.

Add natural synonyms such as "mailing lists" or "group membership" so the skill triggers on phrasings users actually say.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description only says "Google Groups operations through gog" — it names the domain and tool but lists zero concrete actions (no 'list groups', 'list members', etc.), matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It is above 1 because the domain and tool are at least explicitly named, not pure abstraction.	2 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is vague ("operations" could be anything) and there is no 'when' / 'Use when...' clause at all, matching the anchor 'Has a vague what and no when'. Per the rubric guideline a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3, and this sits below that cap because the what is also generic.	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Google Groups" is a phrase users would naturally say, and "gog" names the tool, but common variations like "group members", "mailing lists", "group membership" are absent, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'. Below 4 because coverage is thin — only one natural term plus a jargon tool name.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Google Groups operations through gog" carves out a clear niche (Google Groups via a specific CLI), but "operations" leaves overlap risk with closely related gog skills (e.g., gmail or calendar operations), matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'. Not 5 because nothing in the text bounds the skill against those siblings.	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-groups/SKILL.md
Commit: 414e2ff

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.