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 essentially no useful information for skill selection. It fails on every dimension: it names no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, answers neither 'what' nor 'when', 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 programming languages. Generates unit tests and implements features from specifications.'

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 instruction ('invoke with $agent-coder') from the description field, as it does not help Claude decide when to select this skill and wastes space that should describe capabilities.

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 description of capabilities and no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance.	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 command '$agent-coder' is not a natural trigger term.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Agent skill for coder' is extremely generic and could conflict with virtually any coding-related skill. There is nothing to distinguish it 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 general software engineering best practices that Claude already knows, making it highly token-inefficient. It reads more like a junior developer onboarding document than a targeted skill file. The MCP tool integration section is the only genuinely novel content, but it's buried among pages of redundant guidance on SOLID principles, naming conventions, and file organization.

Suggestions

Remove all general software engineering knowledge (SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, naming conventions, file organization, security basics, testing best practices) that Claude already knows, reducing the skill to only project-specific or tool-specific guidance.

Focus the skill content on the MCP tool integration patterns and coordination protocols, which are the only truly novel and actionable information Claude wouldn't already know.

Add explicit validation checkpoints to the implementation workflow, e.g., 'Run linter after implementation → fix errors → run tests → only commit when all pass.'

Split MCP integration details and collaboration protocols into separate referenced files if the skill needs to cover multiple concerns, or keep the entire skill under 50 lines by focusing on a single clear purpose.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at ~200+ lines. Explains basic concepts Claude already knows well: SOLID principles, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, dependency injection, single responsibility, clear naming conventions, file organization patterns, and general security best practices. Almost every section restates common software engineering knowledge that adds no new information for Claude.	1 / 3
Actionability	Contains some concrete TypeScript code examples that are syntactically valid, but most are generic patterns (error handling, memoization, typing) rather than task-specific executable guidance. The MCP tool integration section shows specific tool calls but uses pseudo-JavaScript syntax rather than actual executable commands. Much of the content describes principles rather than instructing specific actions.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 'Implementation Process' section lists steps (Understand Requirements → Design First → TDD → Incremental Implementation) but lacks validation checkpoints, feedback loops, or error recovery steps. There's no explicit verification between steps, and the process is more of a general methodology description than a concrete 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/ruflo
Commit: 844f68d

Reviewed: about 3 hours 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.