missing-references
This skill references rules that do not have corresponding files in the references directory.
28
Quality
11%
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 ./tests/fixtures/missing-references/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%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 description appears to be an error message or metadata note rather than an actual skill description. It describes a problem state ('rules that do not have corresponding files') rather than explaining what the skill does or when to use it. The description is completely non-functional for skill selection purposes.
Suggestions
Rewrite the description to explain what the skill actually does (e.g., 'Validates rule references and identifies missing files in the references directory').
Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'Use when checking for broken references, validating configuration, or auditing rule files'.
Include specific actions the skill performs (e.g., 'scans rule files, reports missing references, suggests fixes') to make it distinguishable from other validation or file-checking skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague, abstract language ('references rules', 'corresponding files') without describing any concrete actions Claude would perform. No specific capabilities are listed. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. It describes a state or condition rather than a skill's purpose, and has no 'Use when...' clause or trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains no natural keywords a user would say. Terms like 'references directory' and 'corresponding files' are technical jargon that users wouldn't naturally use when seeking help. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague and unclear that it's impossible to distinguish what domain or task this skill addresses. It could potentially conflict with any file-related or validation skill. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially a placeholder or test fixture rather than functional documentation. It lacks any actionable content, provides no concrete guidance on what the rules do or how to use them, and the 'How to Use' section is completely uninformative. The skill appears designed to test validation tooling rather than teach Claude anything useful.
Suggestions
Add concrete descriptions of what each rule does and when it applies, with specific examples of violations and correct patterns
Include a clear workflow explaining how to check for and apply these rules in practice
Provide executable code examples or specific commands that demonstrate rule usage
Either remove references to missing files or ensure all referenced rule files exist with actual content
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is brief but includes some unnecessary filler text like 'This skill is used for testing reference consistency validation' which doesn't add actionable value. The structure is lean but the content itself is placeholder-like. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no concrete, executable guidance. It lists rule names without explaining what they do, how to use them, or providing any code/commands. The 'How to Use' section is completely vague. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow defined. The skill mentions rules exist but provides no steps, sequence, or process for how to apply them or what actions to take. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content has basic structure with headers and a Quick Reference section, but the references mentioned (rule files) are stated as missing, and there's no clear navigation to actual detailed content. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
68%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
description_trigger_hint | Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 11 / 16 Passed | |
- Repository
- pproenca/dot-skills
- Commit
43f0b81
- 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.