CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

review-arguments-dsl

Audits a command class's arguments DSL definition to verify it accurately maps Ruby call arguments to git CLI arguments in the correct order with correct DSL methods and modifiers.

66

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/review-arguments-dsl/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%

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

The body is lean, highly actionable, and well-sequenced with explicit verification steps, but its progressive-disclosure design depends on CHECKLIST.md and related-skill files that are not present in the bundle.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced CHECKLIST.md (and the ../command-*/SKILL.md related skills) with the bundle so the heavily-referenced one-level-deep detail actually resolves.

If CHECKLIST.md is intentionally external, note that explicitly or inline the minimal method-mapping table so the skill is self-sufficient.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with project-specific DSL semantics (flag_option, key_value_option, negatable, as_operand, etc.) that Claude would not already know, and it defers the full method table to CHECKLIST.md rather than padding with generic explanations.

3 / 3

Actionability

Concrete file paths, exact documentation URLs, specific DSL methods with worked mapping examples (flag_option :verbose → --verbose), a numbered workflow, and a defined output table make the guidance directly executable for an audit skill.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Six numbered steps with explicit verification (trace Ruby call → bound argument → expected git CLI, then compare against the man page) and delegation to CHECKLIST.md sections give a clear, checklisted sequence for a read-only audit.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Structure and signaling are strong (clear TOC, one-level-deep references with section anchors), but the primary referenced file CHECKLIST.md is absent from the bundle, so the promised detailed reference cannot actually be loaded.

2 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 concrete, specific, and clearly scoped to a distinct niche, but it omits explicit trigger guidance and leans on technical jargon rather than natural user-facing terms.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when ...' clause stating when Claude should invoke this skill, e.g. 'Use when reviewing or auditing a command class's arguments DSL definition.'

Include a few natural trigger phrases a user would actually say, such as 'audit the arguments DSL' or 'check the DSL mapping', alongside the technical terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates concrete verification targets — "maps Ruby call arguments to git CLI arguments in the correct order with correct DSL methods and modifiers" — naming the artifact (arguments DSL definition) and several specific facets rather than vague language.

3 / 3

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' (audits/verifies the DSL mapping) but provides no 'when should Claude use it' guidance, so per the missing-'Use when...' cap completeness cannot exceed 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant domain keywords are present ("arguments DSL", "Ruby call arguments", "git CLI arguments", "DSL methods and modifiers") but the terms are fairly technical and there is no natural 'Use when...' trigger phrasing or common variations.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is highly specific — auditing a Ruby command class's arguments DSL against git CLI emission — making it unlikely to trigger for an unrelated skill.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 9 missing, 4 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
ruby-git/ruby-git
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.