CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

review-storybook

Review Paperclip stories for a feature or change using the Storybook catalog, production source, and existing browser tests. Report component, mock, interaction, and visual evidence separately.

64

Quality

80%

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 ./.agents/skills/review-storybook/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 content is a dense, efficient instruction skill: it provides concrete commands, real file paths, explicit verification checkpoints, and a clear reporting taxonomy without wasting a token on concepts Claude already knows. Its only structural weakness is the absence of section headers and of exact invocations for the visual suite and dev-server steps. The skill is roughly at the line count where a flat, headerless layout still works, but light structure would improve scanability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence: no explanation of what Storybook or browser tests are, no padding, and every sentence carries an instruction or constraint (e.g., "A screenshot alone does not prove `play` passed"). Every token earns its place, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance is present: the exact command `pnpm build-storybook`, real paths (`ui/storybook-static/index.json`, `tests/storybook-visual/storybook-visual.spec.ts`, `baseline-manifest.json`), and specific inspection steps. Minor gaps remain — e.g., no exact command for running the visual suite or starting the dev server — keeping it just below fully copy-paste-ready, matching the 4 anchor over the 3 anchor's pseudocode-level guidance.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is discernible and ordered (read catalog -> choose discriminating states -> run builds/commands -> inspect rendered subject including play assertions -> visual baseline checks -> structured reporting), with explicit checkpoints like "wait for their `play` assertions to complete" and "Inspect `baseline-manifest.json` before claiming visual regression proof". It falls short of the 5 anchor because the sequence is implicit in prose rather than an explicit numbered workflow with error-recovery loops, though the 3 anchor's missing-checkpoint pattern does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The ~50-line body keeps detail out of SKILL.md by pointing to clearly signaled, one-level-deep external documents ([catalog contract](../../../maps/storybook-map/README.md), [existing Storybook commands](../../../doc/DEVELOPING.md#storybook)), and no content that belongs in separate files is inlined. It misses 5 because the body has no section headers to aid navigation and the referenced paths live outside the bundle, so organization is good but not fully polished.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 specific and clearly third-person, naming concrete inputs (Storybook catalog, production source, browser tests) and a structured reporting output. Its main weakness is the absence of any explicit "when to use" trigger clause, which caps completeness. Distinctiveness within the Paperclip/Storybook niche is excellent.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when asked to review Paperclip/Storybook stories for a feature or change, or when verifying UI component coverage before merge."

Include natural trigger variations users might say, such as "UI review", "component coverage", or "visual regression", to broaden keyword coverage.

Optionally enumerate one or two more concrete actions (e.g., compare built story entry IDs, inspect the visual baseline manifest) to raise specificity to comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Review Paperclip stories... using the Storybook catalog, production source, and existing browser tests" and "Report component, mock, interaction, and visual evidence separately" name concrete actions with specific inputs and enumerated evidence types. It sits above the 3 anchor (only 1-2 generic actions) but below 5 (multiple comprehensive actions), since the description really contains two verbs.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (review Paperclip stories using catalog, source, and browser tests; report four evidence types separately), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance for when to invoke the skill. Per the judging guidelines, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms users would say include "stories", "Storybook", "component", "visual", "browser tests", and "review", giving good domain coverage. A few natural variations (e.g., "UI review", "visual regression", "component tests") are missing, so it falls just short of the comprehensive synonym coverage of the 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Paperclip stories" and "Storybook catalog" establish a clear niche with distinct, project-specific triggers unlikely to collide with other skills. Unlike lower anchors describing generic file or document help, virtually no other skill would match this description.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

paperclipai/paperclip

Path

.agents/skills/review-storybook/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.