golang-code-style
Golang code style, formatting and conventions. Use when writing Go code, reviewing style, configuring linters, writing comments, or establishing project standards.
87
87%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
87%
1.17xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
82%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 a solid description that clearly communicates both purpose and trigger conditions with an explicit 'Use when...' clause. It covers good natural trigger terms for Go development style guidance. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about concrete capabilities beyond the high-level category of 'style, formatting and conventions'.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions to the 'what' portion, e.g., 'Enforces gofmt/goimports formatting, applies effective Go idioms, structures package documentation, configures golangci-lint rules'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Go code) and some actions (writing, reviewing style, configuring linters, writing comments, establishing project standards), but doesn't list specific concrete capabilities like 'enforce gofmt formatting, apply golint rules, structure package documentation'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Golang code style, formatting and conventions') and when ('Use when writing Go code, reviewing style, configuring linters, writing comments, or establishing project standards') with an explicit 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'Go code', 'Golang', 'style', 'formatting', 'conventions', 'linters', 'comments', 'project standards'. These cover terms users would naturally use when seeking Go style guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Reasonably specific to Go language style/conventions, but could overlap with general Go development skills or generic code style/linting skills. The mention of 'linters' and 'project standards' could trigger conflicts with broader tooling skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a high-quality Go code style skill that is concise, actionable, and well-structured. It provides executable code examples for nearly every rule, avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, and uses clear MUST/SHOULD language for rule severity. The only minor weakness is that referenced files (details.md) aren't available in the bundle for verification, and the content is moderately long but well-organized enough to remain navigable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is lean and efficient throughout. It assumes Claude's Go competence, avoids explaining what Go is or how basic constructs work, and every section delivers actionable rules with minimal preamble. The Go Proverbs quote and brief rationales (e.g., 'nil maps panic on write') justify rules without being verbose. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Nearly every rule is accompanied by executable, copy-paste-ready Go code examples showing both good and bad patterns. Concrete guidance is given for line breaking, variable declarations, control flow, function design, and more — all with specific, real-world Go code. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is primarily a style/convention skill rather than a multi-step process skill. The single-task nature (apply these style rules when writing/reviewing Go code) is unambiguous. The parallelizing code reviews section provides a clear workflow for batch review. Per scoring notes, simple skills can score 3 if clear and well-organized, which this is. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill has good cross-references to related skills (naming, design patterns, structs/interfaces, lint) and a [Details](./references/details.md) link for complex conditions and value vs pointer arguments. However, no bundle files were provided, so the referenced details.md cannot be verified. The main content is fairly long (~150+ lines) and some sections like Philosophy could potentially be split out, though it's borderline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- samber/cc-skills-golang
- Commit
e9761db
- 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.