CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

codebase-cleanup-refactor-clean

You are a code refactoring expert specializing in clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, and modern software engineering best practices. Analyze and refactor the provided code to improve its quality, maintainability, and performance.

48

Quality

51%

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/codebase-cleanup-refactor-clean/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%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 well-structured and reasonably concise, with a clear use/anti-use framing and output format. Its main weaknesses are generic, non-concrete instructions and a referenced resource file that is not bundled, which weakens both actionability and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Provide the missing `resources/implementation-playbook.md` or inline a few concrete refactor patterns/examples so guidance is actionable without a broken reference.

Replace vague instruction bullets with specific techniques (e.g., named refactoring patterns, how to detect duplication, concrete test commands).

Add an explicit validation feedback loop (validate -> if failing, fix and re-validate -> only proceed when green) to lift workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with clear sections, but repeats the frontmatter description verbatim at the top and the 'Context' section re-states the skill's purpose, which are minor over-explanations that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Instructions are high-level directives ('Identify high-impact refactor candidates', 'Break work into small, testable steps') rather than concrete techniques, and the detailed patterns are deferred to `resources/implementation-playbook.md`, a file that is not present in the bundle.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A sequence is present (identify -> break into steps -> apply -> validate) and a validation step is mentioned, but there is no explicit feedback loop (validate -> fix -> re-validate) and checkpoints remain implicit.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and the reference to `resources/implementation-playbook.md` is clearly signaled, but that referenced file does not exist in the bundle, so the disclosure structure promises deeper content that is missing.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

45%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 clearly communicates the skill's purpose and specialization but is written in second-person voice and omits any explicit trigger ('Use when...') guidance, which caps completeness and lowers specificity. Trigger-term coverage is decent but lacks common synonyms.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third-person voice (e.g., 'Analyzes and refactors code...') to avoid the second-person specificity penalty.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers (e.g., 'Use when cleaning up codebases, removing duplication, or paying down tech debt').

Include natural synonyms users say ('cleanup', 'tech debt', 'simplify') to improve trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and two concrete actions ('Analyze and refactor the provided code'), matching the score-3 anchor, but reduced by 1 because the description opens with second-person voice ('You are a code refactoring expert') per the voice penalty.

2 / 5

Completeness

Clearly states what the skill does (analyze and refactor code for quality/maintainability/performance) but includes no 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant natural keywords ('refactoring', 'clean code', 'code quality', 'maintainability') but misses common variations users would say such as 'cleanup', 'tech debt', or 'deduplication'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The clean-code/SOLID specialization gives it a niche, but the broad phrase 'modern software engineering best practices' overlaps with many general coding and code-review skills.

3 / 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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
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.