CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

standards-to-tooling

Translates project coding standards into concrete linting and formatting tool configurations. Given human-readable conventions (from AGENTS.md, code review guidelines, or team standards), this skill produces ESLint, Prettier, Biome, TypeScript, and other tool configs that enforce them automatically. Covers discovery, mapping, implementation, verification, and CI integration.

Quality

78%

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 ./skills/software-engineering/standards-to-tooling/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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.

A strong, well-structured single-file skill: concrete rule/config syntax throughout, executable verification commands, and a clear five-step workflow with a dedicated verification phase and a valuable 'Never' guardrail section. The main gaps are the fragmentary CI YAML, the absence of an explicit feedback loop after verification, and the lack of any bundle split for the detailed mapping tables.

Suggestions

Complete the CI snippet (add 'on:' and 'jobs:' keys) or replace it with the exact runnable commands so it is copy-paste ready.

Sequence verification as an explicit feedback loop: run lint/format:check/typecheck, fix failures, and re-run until all checks pass before moving to CI integration.

Move the detailed ESLint/Vue/Prettier/TypeScript mapping tables and the Language Quick Reference into a references/ file, leaving SKILL.md as a lean overview with one-level-deep pointers.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with project-specific values ('singleQuote: true', 'printWidth: 100', 'strict: true') that earn their tokens, but the Language Quick Reference table ('Python | Ruff | mypy / pyright') restates knowledge Claude already has and could be trimmed. Not a 5 because a few tokens are spent re-teaching known material; not a 3 because the padding is minor and localized.

4 / 5

Actionability

Exact rule syntax ('@typescript-eslint/consistent-type-imports: ["error", { prefer: "type-imports" }]') and copy-paste commands ('npx eslint \'web/src/**/*.{ts,js,vue}\'', full package.json scripts) cover the common cases. Not a 5 because the CI block is a fragment — it shows 'name: Lint & Typecheck' and 'steps:' without the 'on:'/'jobs:' hierarchy, so it is not runnable as written.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-phase sequence (Discovery → Mapping → Implementation → Verification → CI Integration) with an explicit verification step listing commands and '--fix' recovery commands. Not a 5 because error recovery is not sequenced as an explicit run → fix → re-run-until-clean feedback loop, only implied by the presence of --fix variants.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-sectioned single file with a clearly signaled References section of external links; no bundle files exist, so all detail is inline. Not a 5 because roughly 80 lines of detailed rule-mapping tables (and the language quick reference) are inlined in SKILL.md rather than split into one-level-deep references/ files; not a 3 because the structure and navigation are good, with only minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

71%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 specific, third-person description that names concrete tools and covers the full workflow phases, with good natural trigger terms and low conflict risk. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause — the input framing ('Given human-readable conventions...') only weakly implies invocation conditions — which caps completeness at 3.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions coding standards, AGENTS.md, setting up or tightening ESLint/Prettier/tsconfig, or wants conventions machine-enforced.'

Broaden trigger coverage with natural synonyms users actually say: 'style guide', 'lint rules', 'conventions', and config filenames such as '.eslintrc' / 'eslint.config.js' / 'tsconfig.json'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It lists multiple concrete actions with comprehensive coverage: 'Translates project coding standards into concrete linting and formatting tool configurations', 'produces ESLint, Prettier, Biome, TypeScript, and other tool configs', and 'Covers discovery, mapping, implementation, verification, and CI integration'. Fits the comprehensive-coverage anchor better than 4, whose 'minor gaps in coverage' is a weaker match given the named tools and full phase enumeration.

5 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is explicit ('Translates project coding standards into... tool configurations'), but there is no 'Use when...' clause; 'Given human-readable conventions (from AGENTS.md, code review guidelines, or team standards)' describes the input and only weakly implies when to invoke the skill. Per the judging guideline, a missing 'Use when' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage: 'linting', 'formatting', 'coding standards', 'ESLint', 'Prettier', 'AGENTS.md', 'code review guidelines', 'team standards'. A few natural terms users would say are missing — 'style guide', 'lint rules', 'conventions' as a trigger, and config filenames like '.eslintrc' or 'tsconfig.json' — so it does not reach the synonym-and-extension comprehensiveness of a 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The standards-to-config translation function plus named tools (ESLint, Prettier, Biome, TypeScript) carves a mostly distinct niche with clear triggers. Minor overlap risk remains with closely related skills such as generic tooling setup/init or writing AGENTS.md/standards documents, which keeps it below the minimal-conflict anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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/software-engineering/standards-to-tooling/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.