quieter
Tones down visually aggressive or overstimulating designs, reducing intensity while preserving quality. Use when the user mentions too bold, too loud, overwhelming, aggressive, garish, or wants a calmer, more refined aesthetic.
78
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./source/skills/quieter/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-crafted skill description with strong trigger terms and a clear 'Use when' clause that makes it easy for Claude to select appropriately. Its main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions taken (e.g., reducing saturation, softening contrasts, muting colors). Overall it's a strong description that clearly carves out a distinct niche.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions to the 'what' portion, e.g., 'reduces color saturation, softens contrasts, mutes bold typography, and tones down high-intensity palettes'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | It names the domain (visual design) and a general action ('tones down visually aggressive designs', 'reducing intensity while preserving quality'), but doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions like adjusting color saturation, reducing contrast, muting typography, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (tones down visually aggressive or overstimulating designs, reducing intensity while preserving quality) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms a user would say: 'too bold', 'too loud', 'overwhelming', 'aggressive', 'garish', 'calmer', 'more refined aesthetic'. These are highly natural phrases users would use when requesting this kind of adjustment. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | This occupies a clear niche — specifically calming down overly intense visual designs. The trigger terms are distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other design skills focused on creation, branding, or layout. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a well-structured framework for reducing visual intensity in designs, with good specific numeric guidance (saturation percentages, font weight mappings, animation distances). However, it lacks concrete code examples (CSS before/after transformations) that would make it truly actionable, and includes some motivational/philosophical statements that waste tokens. The verification step could be stronger with explicit feedback loops.
Suggestions
Add concrete CSS before/after code examples showing specific transformations (e.g., a color palette desaturation, a typography weight reduction, an animation refinement)
Remove motivational statements like 'Great quiet design is harder than great bold design' and 'Quiet design is confident design. It doesn't need to shout' — Claude doesn't need encouragement
Add a feedback loop to the Verify step: if the design is now too bland or generic, specify how to iterate back to the Refine step with adjusted parameters
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill contains some unnecessary elaboration (e.g., 'Great quiet design is harder than great bold design', 'Quiet design is confident design. It doesn't need to shout.') and motivational statements that Claude doesn't need. The checklist items are mostly useful but could be tightened—some bullet points explain obvious design concepts. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The guidance is specific in terms of design principles (e.g., '70-85% saturation', '10-20px instead of 40px', '900 → 600, 700 → 500') which is good, but there are no concrete code examples showing CSS transformations or before/after snippets. For a frontend design skill, executable code examples would significantly improve actionability. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow follows a clear sequence (Assess → Plan → Refine → Verify), but the verification step is just a checklist of questions with no concrete validation method. For a skill that involves modifying existing designs (potentially destructive), there's no feedback loop for iterating if the result is still too intense or has become too bland. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill appropriately delegates foundational design knowledge to external references (frontend-design, teach-impeccable) and keeps its own content focused on the specific task of toning down designs. The sections are well-organized with clear headers and the content is appropriately scoped for a single SKILL.md file. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- pbakaus/impeccable
- Commit
3a4fc70
- 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.