CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

embeddings

Vector embeddings with HNSW indexing, sql.js persistence, and hyperbolic support. 75x faster with agentic-flow integration. Use when: semantic search, pattern matching, similarity queries, knowledge retrieval. Skip when: exact text matching, simple lookups, no semantic understanding needed.

66

1.60x
Quality

56%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

74%

1.60x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/embeddings/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

37%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 skill provides a reasonable overview of the embeddings capability with concrete CLI commands, but lacks depth in actionability—no output examples, no configuration details, and no programmatic code. The biggest weakness is the complete absence of workflow sequencing and validation steps, particularly important for batch operations. Best practices are generic and don't leverage Claude's existing knowledge efficiently.

Suggestions

Add a sequenced workflow showing the typical flow: init → embed → search, with expected output examples and validation steps (e.g., verifying the index was created, checking embedding dimensions).

Include error handling guidance and a feedback loop for batch operations (e.g., 'If batch embed fails, check documents.json format against this schema: ...').

Replace the generic 'Best Practices' section with specific configuration examples (e.g., HNSW parameters, chunking overlap values, when to choose Int4 vs Binary quantization with concrete thresholds).

Add at least one complete programmatic code example showing how to use the embeddings API in code, not just CLI commands.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The feature table and quantization table add some value but the 'Best Practices' section is generic advice Claude already knows. The overall structure is reasonably lean but could be tighter—the feature table largely repeats what's in the description metadata.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete CLI commands which is good, but they are surface-level invocations with no output examples, no error handling, and no explanation of flags or configuration options. There's no executable code showing programmatic usage, and the commands feel like documentation stubs rather than copy-paste-ready workflows.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There is no sequenced workflow—commands are listed independently with no indication of order, dependencies, or validation steps. For batch operations (batch embed) there are no validation checkpoints or error recovery guidance, which the rubric notes should cap this at 2 at best, and the complete absence of sequencing drops it to 1.

1 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is organized into clear sections with headers and tables, which is decent structure. However, there are no references to any supporting files for advanced topics (HNSW configuration, hyperbolic embeddings, chunking configuration), and topics like quantization and hyperbolic embeddings deserve deeper treatment that could be linked out. No bundle files exist to reference, but the skill would benefit from signaling where to find more detail.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

75%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 has strong structural completeness with explicit 'Use when' and 'Skip when' clauses, and occupies a distinct niche. However, it leans too heavily on technical jargon (HNSW, sql.js, hyperbolic) rather than describing concrete user-facing actions, and the '75x faster with agentic-flow integration' claim reads as marketing fluff without substantiation. The actual capabilities could be stated more concretely in terms of what the skill does rather than what technologies it uses.

Suggestions

Replace technical implementation details ('HNSW indexing, sql.js persistence, hyperbolic support') with concrete actions like 'indexes documents for semantic search, finds similar content, retrieves relevant knowledge from large corpora'.

Add more natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'find similar', 'vector search', 'nearest neighbor', 'related documents', or 'semantic similarity'.

Remove the unsubstantiated performance claim '75x faster with agentic-flow integration' which reads as marketing fluff and doesn't help Claude select the right skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (vector embeddings) and some technical specifics (HNSW indexing, sql.js persistence, hyperbolic support), but the actual actions/capabilities are described vaguely as use cases ('semantic search, pattern matching') rather than concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'index documents', 'query nearest neighbors', 'store embeddings').

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (vector embeddings with HNSW indexing, sql.js persistence, hyperbolic support) and 'when' with explicit 'Use when' and 'Skip when' clauses listing specific trigger scenarios. The 'Skip when' clause is a nice addition for disambiguation.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant terms like 'semantic search', 'similarity queries', 'knowledge retrieval', and 'pattern matching' that users might say. However, it's heavy on technical jargon ('HNSW indexing', 'hyperbolic support', 'sql.js persistence') that users are unlikely to use in natural requests, and misses common variations like 'find similar', 'vector search', 'embeddings', or 'nearest neighbor'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche around vector embeddings and semantic search, with the 'Skip when' clause explicitly distinguishing it from exact text matching and simple lookup skills. The technical specifics (HNSW, sql.js) further reduce conflict risk.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
ruvnet/claude-flow
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.