golang-popular-libraries
Recommends production-ready Golang libraries and frameworks. Apply when the user explicitly asks for library suggestions, wants to compare alternatives, needs to choose a library for a specific task, or when a new dependency is being added to the project.
77
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/golang-popular-libraries/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%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 well-structured skill description with a clear 'Apply when...' clause covering multiple trigger scenarios and good natural language keywords. Its main weakness is that the 'what' portion is somewhat thin—it only says 'recommends' without elaborating on the specific evaluation criteria or actions involved (e.g., comparing benchmarks, checking maintenance activity, evaluating license compatibility).
Suggestions
Expand the capability description with more specific actions, e.g., 'Recommends production-ready Golang libraries and frameworks by evaluating maintenance status, community adoption, performance benchmarks, and license compatibility.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | It names the domain (Golang libraries and frameworks) and the core action (recommends), but doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions beyond recommending—e.g., it could mention evaluating maintenance status, comparing benchmarks, checking license compatibility. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (recommends production-ready Golang libraries and frameworks) and 'when' (explicit 'Apply when...' clause listing four distinct trigger scenarios). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'library suggestions', 'compare alternatives', 'choose a library', 'dependency', 'Golang'. These cover common phrasings well. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Narrowly scoped to Golang library/framework recommendations specifically, which is a clear niche unlikely to conflict with general coding skills, Go syntax skills, or library skills for other languages. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is well-organized as a hub document with good progressive disclosure to reference files and related skills. However, it suffers from redundancy across its philosophy, guidelines, and anti-patterns sections, and lacks concrete actionable examples—such as a sample recommendation workflow, decision criteria, or example output format—that would make it truly useful for guiding Claude's behavior.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example showing what a good library recommendation looks like (e.g., 'User asks for HTTP router → check net/http → if need middleware chaining, recommend chi with rationale').
Consolidate 'Core Philosophy', 'General Guidelines', and 'Anti-Patterns' into a single concise decision framework or checklist to eliminate redundancy.
Add explicit evaluation criteria for assessing a library (e.g., 'last commit < 6 months, >1k GitHub stars, permissive license, minimal transitive dependencies') to make the maturity check actionable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary padding. The 'Core Philosophy' and 'General Guidelines' sections overlap significantly (both emphasize stdlib-first, simplicity, maturity). The 'Anti-Patterns to Avoid' section largely restates the guidelines in negative form. The persona line and closing reminder ('The best library is often no library at all') are redundant given the repeated stdlib-first messaging. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides directional guidance (assess requirements, check stdlib, prioritize maturity) but lacks concrete examples. There are no specific library recommendations inline, no example recommendation format, no code snippets, and no demonstration of what a good recommendation looks like. The actual actionable content is deferred entirely to reference files which were not provided for evaluation. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a loose sequence implied (assess requirements → check stdlib → evaluate maturity → consider complexity → think about dependencies), but it lacks explicit validation checkpoints. For a recommendation skill, there's no checklist for evaluating a library (e.g., check last commit date, check license, check dependency count) and no concrete decision criteria for when to recommend stdlib vs external. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is well-structured as an overview with clear one-level-deep references to three categorized reference files (stdlib.md, libraries.md, tools.md) and cross-references to related skills. Navigation is clearly signaled with descriptive labels. The external awesome-go link provides a fallback for uncovered cases. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.