CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tool-rename-deprecation

Ensure renamed built-in tool references preserve backward compatibility. Use when renaming a toolReferenceName, tool set referenceName, or any tool identifier. Run on ANY change to tool registration code. Covers legacyToolReferenceFullNames for tools and legacyFullNames for tool sets.

68

Quality

81%

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

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced skill with concrete examples and validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are repeated emphasis of the same pitfall and a monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure into reference files.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 'never rename the name/id field' warning into one authoritative callout and reference it from the other locations instead of restating it four times.

Move Real Examples, Reference PRs, and the longer before/after code samples into a reference file (e.g. references/examples.md) and link to it from the body to improve progressive disclosure.

Trim the duplicated rationale in Anti-patterns that re-explains the id: rawTool.name mapping already covered in Step 1.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and free of basic-concept padding, but the critical 'never rename the name field' warning is restated four times (Step 1 Critical, Step 2, Regression Check #2, Anti-patterns), which could be tightened into a single authoritative callout.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable before/after TypeScript and jsonc examples, a concrete createToolSet call, exact file paths and function names, and links to real reference PRs — copy-paste ready guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sequences the work into Steps 1–4 plus a numbered Regression Check with explicit verification checkpoints ('read the actual array', 'confirm it wasn't removed', 'Verify no entries were removed') for a batch/review operation.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized, but the skill is a single ~150-line monolithic file with no reference files; content like Real Examples, Reference PRs, and the long code samples is inline where it could be split out one level deep.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

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, specific description that clearly states both capability and trigger conditions, with concrete field names. It would score higher on trigger-term quality if it supplemented the internal jargon with more natural phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete targets — 'renaming a toolReferenceName, tool set referenceName, or any tool identifier' and 'Covers legacyToolReferenceFullNames for tools and legacyFullNames for tool sets' — naming specific fields and arrays rather than vague actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('preserve backward compatibility', 'Covers legacy...') and when ('Use when renaming...', 'Run on ANY change to tool registration code') with an explicit trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms ('renaming', 'tool registration code') but leans heavily on internal field-name jargon (toolReferenceName, referenceName, legacyToolReferenceFullNames) and omits simpler natural phrasings a user might say like 'rename' or 'deprecate a tool'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear narrow niche (built-in VS Code tool/tool-set rename deprecation) with distinctive triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
posit-dev/positron
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.