agent-coder

Agent skill for coder - invoke with $agent-coder

1.12x

Quality

13%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

79%

1.12x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-coder/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is an extremely weak description that provides almost no useful information for skill selection. It fails on every dimension: it names no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, lacks both 'what' and 'when' guidance, and is so generic it would conflict with any coding-related skill.

Suggestions

Replace the entire description with specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Writes, debugs, and refactors code across multiple languages including Python, JavaScript, and TypeScript.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to write code, fix bugs, refactor functions, or implement features.'

Remove the invocation syntax ('invoke with $agent-coder') from the description and focus on capability and trigger information that helps Claude select the right skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for coder' is extremely vague and does not describe what the skill actually does.	1 / 3
Completeness	Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no description of capabilities.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The only potentially relevant term is 'coder', which is overly generic. There are no natural keywords a user would say when needing a specific coding task performed. The invocation syntax '$agent-coder' is not a natural trigger term.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Coder' is extremely generic and would conflict with virtually any coding-related skill. There is nothing to distinguish this from other programming or development skills.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

27%

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

This skill is a verbose collection of generic software engineering best practices that Claude already knows, padded with basic concepts (SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, file organization). The MCP tool integration section adds some novel value but uses unclear syntax. The skill would benefit enormously from being reduced to only the project-specific conventions, MCP coordination patterns, and any truly novel guidance, cutting roughly 70-80% of the content.

Suggestions

Remove all generic software engineering advice (SOLID, DRY, KISS, naming conventions, file organization, testing best practices) that Claude already knows, and focus only on project-specific patterns and MCP tool integration.

Split MCP tool integration and collaboration protocols into a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with links.

Add explicit validation checkpoints to the implementation workflow (e.g., 'Run linter after implementation', 'Verify tests pass before marking complete') with concrete commands.

Make MCP tool examples use proper executable syntax rather than the current pseudo-JSON format, and clarify whether these are function calls, API requests, or something else.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at ~200+ lines. Explains basic concepts Claude already knows well (SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, single responsibility, dependency injection, error handling patterns, file organization conventions). Most of the content is generic software engineering advice that adds no novel information for Claude.	1 / 3
Actionability	Contains some concrete TypeScript code examples and MCP tool invocation patterns, but much of the guidance is abstract ('Review specifications thoroughly', 'Plan the architecture', 'Consider extensibility'). The MCP tool examples use a non-standard syntax that isn't clearly executable, and the code examples are illustrative rather than task-specific.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 'Implementation Process' section provides a numbered sequence (Understand → Design → TDD → Incremental), but lacks validation checkpoints, error recovery steps, or feedback loops. There's no explicit verification step after implementation, and the process is more of a general methodology description than an actionable workflow with checkpoints.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files and no bundle files to support it. All content—from code style guidelines to MCP integration to collaboration notes—is inlined in a single long document with no clear navigation or content splitting strategy.	1 / 3
	Total	6 / 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: ruvnet/claude-flow
Commit: 9d4a9ea

Reviewed: 6 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.