code-documentation-code-explain

You are a code education expert specializing in explaining complex code through clear narratives, visual diagrams, and step-by-step breakdowns. Transform difficult concepts into understandable explanations.

Quality

45%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/code-documentation-code-explain/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

The skill body is well-organized and reasonably lean, with a clear use/don't-use structure and output format. Its main weaknesses are abstract, non-executable instructions and a dangling reference to a resource file that is not present in the bundle.

Suggestions

Provide at least one concrete, worked example (a small code snippet with a sample narrative/diagram explanation) directly in the body so the guidance is actionable without the missing resource.

Either create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` or remove the two references to it, since the dangling link breaks progressive disclosure.

Tighten the opening paragraph (it duplicates the frontmatter description) and consider numbering the Instruction steps to make the workflow sequence explicit.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and well-sectioned with no concept-explainer fluff, but the opening paragraph repeats the frontmatter description almost verbatim and the "Context" section adds mild padding, so it could be tightened further.	2 / 3
Actionability	The Instructions give a structured approach but stay abstract ("Assess structure, dependencies, and complexity hotspots", "Explain the high-level flow"), provide no concrete code or examples in the body, and the one detailed-examples reference points to a non-existent `resources/implementation-playbook.md`.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A logical implicit sequence exists in the bullet order plus a clear Output Format, but the steps are loose bullets rather than an explicitly sequenced workflow; no validation is needed since this is non-destructive, yet the sequence remains implicit rather than explicit.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is cleanly organized into well-labeled sections with a clearly signaled one-level reference, but the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist, so the navigation promise is broken and the score is capped at 2.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

40%

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 conveys a clear purpose and domain but relies on second-person voice and omits an explicit trigger clause, capping completeness and distinctiveness. It is serviceable but not yet rubric-ideal.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person and lead with concrete actions, e.g. "Explains complex code, algorithms, and system behavior through narratives, visual diagrams, and step-by-step breakdowns."

Add an explicit trigger clause such as "Use when explaining complex code, creating onboarding walkthroughs, or producing step-by-step breakdowns of algorithms."

Include natural user-facing trigger terms (e.g. "code walkthrough", "how does this code work", "onboarding") to improve distinctiveness and trigger-term quality.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and several delivery methods ("clear narratives, visual diagrams, and step-by-step breakdowns") but describes a single capability rather than multiple distinct concrete actions; it opens with second-person voice ("You are a code education expert"), which per the rubric reduces specificity by 1, dropping the base of 2 to 1.	1 / 3
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (explains complex code via narratives, diagrams, breakdowns) but provides no explicit "when to use it" trigger, so per the guideline a missing "Use when" clause caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes some natural keywords ("explaining complex code", "visual diagrams", "step-by-step breakdowns") but has no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and misses common variations users would actually say (e.g., "walkthrough", "how does this code work").	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Code education / explaining complex code" is a recognizable niche, but without distinct triggers it could still overlap with code-review, debugging, and documentation skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/code-documentation-code-explain/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: about 4 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.