framework-migration-deps-upgrade

You are a dependency management expert specializing in safe, incremental upgrades of project dependencies. Plan and execute dependency updates with minimal risk, proper testing, and clear migration pa

Quality

49%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/framework-migration-deps-upgrade/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

40%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 concise but largely generic template text with no concrete, executable guidance or a real validated workflow, and it references a resource file that does not exist in the bundle. It needs specific steps, validation checkpoints, and either the missing playbook file or removal of the dangling reference.

Suggestions

Replace the generic instruction bullets with concrete, executable steps (specific commands for detecting outdated deps, running upgrades, and running the test suite).

Add explicit validation checkpoints and a rollback feedback loop for the risky batch upgrade operations (e.g., 'run tests; if failing, revert lockfile and re-pin').

Either create the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' with detailed patterns or remove the dangling reference so navigation is not broken.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and does not pad with concepts Claude already knows; every section is short, though the lean quality is slightly undermined by generic phrasing, fitting the 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor rather than a clean 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Instructions are high-level abstractions ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') with no concrete code, commands, or specific steps, matching the 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints missing specific steps' anchor.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is no genuine sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints — just generic bullet guidance and a deliverables list — and dependency upgrades are risky/batch operations requiring validation, fitting the 'rough sequence present but many gaps; validation absent' anchor.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body points to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' for detailed patterns, but no such file exists in any bundle directory (references/scripts/assets/resources are all absent), so the signaled structure is missing, matching the 'minimal structure; references buried or absent' anchor.	2 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 conveys the skill's purpose with concrete actions and a distinct niche, but it uses second-person voice and omits an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, which caps completeness and limits trigger-term quality. Tightening voice to third person and adding natural trigger phrases would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person (e.g., 'Plans and executes safe, incremental dependency upgrades') to remove the second-person specificity penalty.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases users say ('upgrade dependencies', 'bump packages', 'fix outdated deps', 'resolve version conflicts').

Include common synonyms and tool-specific terms (lockfiles, package managers, semver, breaking changes) to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and several concrete actions ('Plan and execute dependency updates', 'minimal risk, proper testing, and clear migration paths'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; the second-person voice ('You are a dependency management expert') triggers the -1 specificity penalty, bringing it down from 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does but provides no explicit 'when' trigger guidance, so per the missing-'Use when' cap completeness is held at 3 even though the 'what' is clear.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It contains relevant keywords ('dependency upgrades', 'project dependencies', 'dependency updates') but omits natural variations users actually say ('bump dependencies', 'outdated packages', 'update my deps', lockfile/package-manager terms) and lacks a 'Use when' trigger clause, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The dependency-upgrade niche is fairly distinct with minimal conflict risk, though broad phrasing and absent trigger boundaries leave minor overlap risk with general development skills, matching the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 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/framework-migration-deps-upgrade/SKILL.md
Commit: 3eff4af

Reviewed: 1 day 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.