CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

version

The version of Remotion we are working on.

51

Quality

56%

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/version/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 body is exemplary in its token efficiency — it locates the authoritative version in source rather than hardcoding it, and states the bump policy and goal in four lines. Its weakness is executability: it never says how to find version references in the docs or how to confirm none were missed, leaving the core task underspecified.

Suggestions

Add the derivation rule explicitly ("next = current with the patch segment incremented") so the bump arithmetic is unambiguous.

Add a concrete discovery step, e.g. `grep -rn "<current version>" docs/` or the doc paths where the version is rendered, instead of the bare imperative "Ensure the docs correctly reference the next version".

Close with a verification step such as re-running the search to confirm no stale version strings remain — required because a doc-wide update is a batch operation.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Four lean lines with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the time-sensitive version value is resolved via a live file pointer (`packages/core/src/version.ts`) rather than a hardcoded number, so nothing will go stale. Every line either locates the version source, states the bump type, or defines the task.

5 / 5

Actionability

The file path is a concrete, readable pointer, but "Ensure the docs correctly reference the next version" is a goal rather than an instruction — no search strategy (which docs, grep for what), no doc locations, and no arithmetic for deriving the next patch version from the current one.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

An implicit read-current → derive-next-patch → update-docs sequence exists, but updating docs across a repo is a batch operation with no verification step (e.g. grep for leftover old-version strings), which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the batch-operations rule.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A four-line, single-file body with no bundle files needs no external references or sections; it is trivially navigable and nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined, satisfying the simple-skill exception.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

40%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 reads as a state-of-the-world fact rather than a capability statement: it identifies the domain (Remotion versioning) but says nothing about what the skill does or when to invoke it. It is distinct by virtue of naming a specific product, yet it would rarely be selected by trigger matching because it offers no actions or use-conditions.

Suggestions

Rewrite the description as a capability statement with a verb, e.g. "Tracks the current Remotion version and its next release so changes can reference the correct version."

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use when a task mentions Remotion versions, releases, version bumps, or when docs/code must reference the upcoming version."

Include the natural synonym set (release, bump, patch, changelog, version.ts) so the skill surfaces for the phrasings users actually type.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"The version of Remotion we are working on" names a specific domain (Remotion's version) but contains no action verbs whatsoever — it is below anchor 3 ("1-2 concrete actions") yet more concrete than anchor 1's pure abstraction ("Helps with documents").

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is a vague noun phrase (it never states whether the skill reads, checks, or updates the version) and there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance at all, matching anchor 2 ("vague 'what' and no 'when'").

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The keywords "Remotion" and "version" are natural and specific to the niche, but common variations users would say — "release", "bump", "upgrade", "changelog", "versioning" — are entirely missing, matching anchor 3 ("Works with PDF files").

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming Remotion gives it a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against other project-context skills, but it lacks the explicit trigger phrasing that anchor 5's example carries.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

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
remotion-dev/remotion
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.