CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

bash-script-validator

Comprehensive toolkit for validating, linting, and optimizing bash and shell scripts. Use this skill when working with shell scripts (.sh, .bash), validating script syntax, detecting unquoted variables, checking POSIX compliance, identifying unsafe command substitutions, validating shebang lines, finding security vulnerabilities, or debugging shell script problems.

68

Quality

86%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 highly actionable and well-structured: an executable entry-point command, a templated response format, and a genuine progressive-disclosure layout backed by a complete, verifiable bundle. The main weaknesses are redundancy — the Mindset section and the Anti-Patterns section make the same four points twice — and a workflow that stops before re-validating fixes or folding in the runtime sandbox-testing step the Mindset itself mandates.

Suggestions

Collapse the Mindset section into the Anti-Patterns section (or vice versa): the four NEVER rules already restate, with WHY/BAD/GOOD framing, every point the Mindset paragraph makes, so one of the two can be deleted outright with no loss of guidance.

Add a closing feedback step to the Required Workflow, e.g. "6. Re-run: bash scripts/validate.sh <script-path> and repeat until no errors remain; then test the script with representative inputs in a sandbox", so the fix→verify loop the Mindset mandates is an explicit checkpoint rather than prose.

Trim or merge the 'Validation Logic' section into the 'Example Output' sample — the seven logic steps re-describe behavior the sample output and exit-code table already demonstrate.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The Mindset paragraph and the four Anti-Patterns each restate the same four points (runtime testing over ShellCheck, global SCxxxx suppressions, sh-vs-bash shebang mismatch, exit-code swallowing with `|| true`/`exit 0`), and "Validation Logic" re-describes what the "Example Output" sample already demonstrates. It is not 4 because this duplication is more than minor trimming — roughly the whole Mindset section is repeated with WHY/BAD/GOOD framing — and not 2 because nothing explains concepts Claude doesn't know and every section still carries some signal.

3 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: the copy-paste command "bash scripts/validate.sh <script-path>", a ready-to-use Response Format Template showing exactly how to present each issue (problem/reference/fix/why), concrete install commands for three options, documented exit codes (0/1/2), and a realistic sample of validator output. It is not 4 because there are no gaps — the common case (run validator, report each issue in the templated format) is covered end to end with copy-paste-ready material.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Required Workflow is a clear numbered sequence (run validator → read output → consult common-mistakes.md / shellcheck-reference.md → per-issue show/explain/fix/why), but there is no "re-run the validator to confirm the fixes" checkpoint, and the Mindset's mandated sandbox execution of the script never appears as a workflow step. It is not 5 because the fix→verify feedback loop is missing, and not 3 because the sequence is explicit, concrete, and includes per-issue handling with pointed reference lookups rather than having only implicit checkpoints.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md stays an overview — workflow, output format, install, and anti-patterns — with all detail pushed one level deep into real bundle files (all 8 references/*.md, both scripts, and all 4 assets exist and match the Layout section), each listed with a one-line description, and the workflow says exactly when to open common-mistakes.md versus shellcheck-reference.md. It is not 4 because navigation is essentially complete: references are clearly signaled, correctly scoped, and nothing that belongs in a bundle file is inlined.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

88%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.

A strong description: it names the domain, lists a comprehensive set of concrete validation actions, and pairs them with an explicit 'Use this skill when…' trigger clause covering file extensions, specific checks, and debugging. The only deductions are a slightly over-claimed "optimizing", a generic first trigger that could collide with a script-authoring sibling skill, and the absence of widely-used natural terms like "ShellCheck".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists many concrete actions — "validating script syntax, detecting unquoted variables, checking POSIX compliance, identifying unsafe command substitutions, validating shebang lines, finding security vulnerabilities" — giving comprehensive coverage of the validation domain, matching the anchor-5 example's breadth. It is not 4 because the action list is comprehensive rather than having only minor gaps; the lone soft spot is the mildly over-claimed "optimizing", which the body does not fully support but does not dilute the concrete action coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both parts: the what ("Comprehensive toolkit for validating, linting, and optimizing bash and shell scripts") and the when ("Use this skill when working with shell scripts (.sh, .bash), validating script syntax, …") with concrete trigger phrases. This directly matches the anchor-5 example structure ('what' list followed by an explicit 'Use when…' clause with triggers).

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural phrases users would say ("shell scripts", "debugging shell script problems") and file extensions (".sh, .bash") with the bash/shell synonym pair, but misses common terms like "ShellCheck" and "bashisms" that a user validating a script would plausibly say. It is not 5 because a few natural terms are missing, and not 3 because coverage otherwise clearly exceeds 'some relevant keywords'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The action triggers (POSIX compliance, shebang validation, security auditing) carve out a clear validation niche, but the opening trigger "when working with shell scripts (.sh, .bash)" is generic enough to also fire for script-authoring requests, overlapping the sibling `bash-script-generator` skill that the body itself acknowledges. It is not 5 because of this overlap risk with a closely related skill, and not 3 because the bulk of the triggers are validator-specific.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

pantheon-org/tekhne

Path

skills/development/scripting/bash-script/validator/SKILL.md

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.