CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

rill-metrics-view

Detailed instructions and examples for developing metrics view resources in Rill

Quality

67%

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 ./skills/rill-metrics-view/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%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 a strong, highly actionable reference: concrete YAML examples throughout, explicit best practices, dialect-specific SQL, and hard rules stated as parse errors. Its main weaknesses are structural — the inline full JSON schema bloats token cost and duplicates prose, and the development workflow (create file, run rill start, validate) is never laid out as an explicit sequence. Moving the schema to a reference file and adding a short quick-start workflow would lift both conciseness and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Move the full JSON schema (the '## Reference documentation' section) into a references/schema.md file and keep only a short summary inline, cutting ~40% of the skill's token footprint and eliminating duplication of format_preset, cache, and security descriptions.

Add an explicit quick-start workflow with validation checkpoints: create metrics/<name>.yaml with version: 1 and an explore: block, run rill start, fix any validation/parse errors, and confirm the dashboard renders.

Deduplicate content that appears in both prose and schema (format presets, cache configuration, security options) so each fact is stated once.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The instructional prose is lean and entirely Rill-specific (e.g., 'Do NOT set dimensions: or measures: in a derived metrics view', parse-error rules, dialect-specific functions), but the ~330-line inline JSON schema duplicates prose coverage (format_preset options, cache config, security) and could be tightened into a separate reference file. It sits above the 'noticeably verbose' anchor because the schema adds properties absent from prose (lookup_*, query_attributes, window), but below 'efficient' due to the duplication.

3 / 5

Actionability

Every section provides copy-paste-ready YAML: a fully annotated complete metrics view ('metrics/orders.yaml' with dimensions, measures, and explore block), concrete security examples with templated user attributes, and dialect-specific executable SQL expressions (COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE status = 'completed'), countIf(status = 'completed'), APPROX_COUNT_DISTINCT_DS_HLL(user_id)). This matches the 'fully executable, covers common cases' anchor.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The content is organized by topic rather than as a workflow: an implicit build order exists (table source, timeseries, dimensions, measures, explore, security) and parse-error rules are stated, but there is no explicit sequence with validation checkpoints (create the file in metrics/, run rill start, check for validation errors) — that crucial workflow step is buried only in the schema's top-level description. Checkpoints are missing or implicit, matching anchor 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body has good section headers, but no bundle files exist and the full JSON schema (roughly 330 lines of API reference) is inlined at the end under '## Reference documentation' when it clearly belongs in a separate references/ file. This matches 'content that should be separate is inline' with some structure present.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 clear, third-person, and unambiguous about its niche (Rill metrics views), giving it excellent distinctiveness. However, it lacks any 'when to use' trigger guidance and enumerates only one action, so it underperforms on completeness and trigger-term coverage. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural synonyms (semantic layer, dashboards) would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when creating or editing metrics view YAML files in a Rill project, or when the user mentions Rill dashboards, semantic layers, dimensions, or measures.'

Enumerate the main capabilities (define dimensions and measures, configure timeseries, security policies, explore dashboards) instead of the generic 'detailed instructions and examples'.

Include natural synonyms such as 'semantic layer', 'metrics layer', and 'Rill dashboard' to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"developing metrics view resources in Rill" names the domain and a single concrete action but does not enumerate the skill's capabilities (dimensions, measures, dashboards, security), matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the 'several specific actions' level above.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description clearly states what the skill contains ("Detailed instructions and examples for developing metrics view resources in Rill") but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"metrics view" and "Rill" are the natural terms a user of this tool would say, but common synonyms and related phrases users might utter (semantic layer, dashboards, dimensions, measures) are absent, matching 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Rill" and "metrics view" define a narrow product-specific niche with distinct triggers; it is hard to imagine this description firing for any unrelated skill, matching the 'clear niche with minimal conflict risk' anchor.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (857 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 9 suspicious

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

rilldata/agent-skills

Path

skills/rill-metrics-view/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.