reference-builder

Creates exhaustive technical references and API documentation. Generates comprehensive parameter listings, configuration guides, and searchable reference materials. Use PROACTIVELY for API docs, configuration references, or complete technical specifications.

Quality

51%

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/reference-builder/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

35%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 verbose, generic template of documentation best practices that explains knowledge Claude already has, offers only a placeholder scaffold instead of executable guidance, and keeps everything inline with no progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Strip generic explanations of what API/config/schema docs are and keep only skill-specific structure, templates, and rules Claude would not already infer.

Replace the placeholder Entry Format with one fully worked, real example (a concrete method entry) and add executable validation such as a script or checklist command.

Move type-specific reference templates (API, Configuration, Schema) into separate reference files linked from a concise overview to enable proper progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~177-line body largely explains concepts Claude already knows (what an API reference, configuration guide, schema doc, or table should contain) via generic bullet lists, adding padded context rather than skill-specific knowledge.	1 / 3
Actionability	The Entry Format code block provides a concrete scaffold template, but it is placeholder pseudocode ([Feature/Method/Parameter Name], [Data type or signature]) with no executable commands or real worked examples; most guidance is abstract directives like 'Document behavior, not implementation'.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 'Reference Building Process' lists a sequenced six-step flow including a Validation step, but validation is described abstractly ('Verify accuracy and completeness') with no explicit checkpoints, commands, or feedback loops for fixing failures.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are clearly headed and organized, but the entire body is a single monolithic file with no bundle files and no references split out, so substantial template and type-specific content that should live one level deep is inlined.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 cleanly states what the skill does and includes an explicit proactive trigger, but its actions read as abstract categories rather than concrete operations and its trigger terms are somewhat narrow and broad.

Suggestions

Replace abstract verbs with concrete actions a user would recognize (e.g. 'Generate API method references, parameter tables, and configuration guides from source code').

Broaden trigger terms to natural user phrasings like 'reference docs', 'parameter documentation', or 'schema references'.

Tighten the niche so it cannot fire for general documentation or config-editing tasks.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain and several actions ("Creates exhaustive technical references and API documentation", "Generates comprehensive parameter listings, configuration guides, and searchable reference materials"), but these are abstract categories rather than the concrete file-level operations that anchor a 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what it does (creates references, generates listings/guides) and when to use it via the explicit "Use PROACTIVELY for ..." trigger clause, satisfying the what-and-when bar for a 3.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	"Use PROACTIVELY for API docs, configuration references, or complete technical specifications" supplies relevant natural keywords, but coverage is limited and misses common variations a user might actually say (e.g. "reference docs", "parameter docs", "schema docs").	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The reference/documentation niche is reasonably distinct, but "complete technical specifications" and "configuration references" are broad enough to overlap with general documentation or config skills, so it is not a clearly bounded niche.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/reference-builder/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: 13 days 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.