project-conventions

Core conventions and patterns for ExcelMcp

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

92%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a dense, actionable conventions reference with executable code, exact commands, and clear validated workflows. Its only weakness is structure: everything lives inline with no progressive disclosure to supporting reference files.

Suggestions

Split the larger convention groups (Testing, Bug Report Triage, Error Handling) into one-level-deep reference files linked from the overview to reduce inline length.

Consider a short top-of-file quick-reference or 'when to consult this skill' pointer so the overview orients the reader before the detailed rules.

If reference files are added, signal them explicitly (e.g. 'See TESTING.md for the full test harness contract') so navigation is unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean bullet/code reference content with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line encodes ExcelMcp-specific knowledge that earns its place.	3 / 3
Actionability	It gives fully executable guidance: a concrete C# code pattern, an exact test command (`dotnet test tests/ExcelMcp.Core.Tests --filter ...`), specific file paths, and named APIs — copy-paste ready.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Multi-step sequences are explicit and validated: TDD (RED→implement→GREEN), the ordered three-step Triage Pattern, and testing rules requiring round-trip validation and exit-code assertions provide clear checkpoints.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized, but all content is inline in a single 115-line file with no reference bundle files; some convention groups (e.g. testing, triage) could be split into one-level-deep references, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

25%

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 identifies the target product but is generic and lacks both concrete actions and an explicit use-when trigger. It is distinguishable mainly by the product name, not by capability phrasing.

Suggestions

Replace 'Core conventions and patterns' with concrete actions, e.g. 'Enforces ExcelMcp error-propagation, COM cleanup, and testing conventions when writing or reviewing ExcelMcp C# code.'

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when modifying ExcelMcp Core/MCP/CLI commands, triaging Excel bugs, or writing integration tests for the ExcelMcp toolset.'

Include natural user-facing keywords (Excel automation, MCP tools, COM interop, dotnet test) rather than abstract 'conventions and patterns' phrasing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Core conventions and patterns" names only an abstract domain category with no concrete actions, matching the vague 'Helps with documents' anchor rather than the action-listing level 2/3 anchors.	1 / 3
Completeness	It states a weak 'what' (conventions/patterns) but provides no 'when to use' trigger clause, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 2; it is above level 1 only because a subject is identified.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	"conventions and patterns" is technical jargon a user would not naturally say; the only candidate keyword is the product name 'ExcelMcp', so natural trigger coverage is absent.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The named tool 'ExcelMcp' gives it a niche, but the generic 'conventions and patterns' framing could overlap with other codebase-conventions skills, fitting the 'somewhat specific but could overlap' anchor.	2 / 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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: sbroenne/mcp-server-excel
Commit: b268be5

Reviewed: 7 days 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.