agent-payments
Agent skill for payments - invoke with $agent-payments
48
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 100%
↑ 3.70xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically deficient across all dimensions. It provides no concrete actions, no natural trigger terms, no guidance on when to use it, and is so generic it would conflict with any payment-related skill. The description essentially only names a domain without any useful detail for skill selection.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Process credit card payments, issue refunds, check transaction status, generate invoices').
Include a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about payments, refunds, billing, charges, or transaction history').
Add natural keywords users would say such as 'refund', 'charge', 'invoice', 'billing', 'transaction', 'payment status', 'credit card'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for payments' is completely vague and does not describe what the skill actually does (e.g., process payments, refund transactions, check balances). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no explanation of capabilities beyond the vague domain of 'payments'. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only keyword is 'payments' which is extremely generic. Missing natural terms users would say like 'refund', 'charge', 'transaction', 'invoice', 'billing', etc. The '$agent-payments' is a command syntax, not a natural trigger term. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Payments' is extremely broad and could conflict with any finance, billing, invoicing, or transaction-related skills. No specific niche or distinct triggers are provided. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a reasonable overview of payment-related MCP functions but reads more like a persona description than actionable guidance. The toolkit section is the strongest part, but lacks executable examples with expected outputs. Critical payment workflows lack validation steps and error handling guidance, which is concerning for financial operations.
Suggestions
Add complete workflow examples for common operations (e.g., 'Check balance -> Create payment if low -> Verify payment completed') with explicit validation steps
Replace the persona framing ('You are...', 'Your core responsibilities') with direct instructions - Claude doesn't need role-play setup
Include concrete examples showing function calls with sample inputs and expected response formats
Add error handling guidance for payment failures, insufficient funds, and other financial edge cases
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content includes some unnecessary framing ('You are a Flow Nexus Payments Agent') and verbose lists of responsibilities that Claude could infer. The toolkit section is efficient, but the surrounding context is padded. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The JavaScript toolkit provides concrete function signatures which is helpful, but they're not fully executable examples with context. Missing actual usage examples showing input/output or error handling scenarios. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No clear multi-step workflows are defined. The 'financial management approach' lists concepts but doesn't sequence them into actionable processes. No validation checkpoints for payment operations which are inherently risky. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably organized with clear sections, but everything is inline in one file. For a skill of this complexity covering payments, credits, tiers, and analytics, some content could be split into reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.