update-docs
Syncs documentation from source-of-truth files like package.json and .env.example
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:sc30gsw/claude-code-customes --skill update-docs57
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%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 a specific niche (syncing docs from source files) and mentions concrete file types, which is helpful. However, it lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and doesn't enumerate the specific actions performed, making it harder for Claude to know when to select this skill over others.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'sync docs', 'update documentation', 'docs out of date', 'README needs updating'
List specific concrete actions such as 'updates README sections', 'syncs dependency versions', 'propagates environment variable documentation'
Include common file variations users might mention: 'README', 'docs', '.env', 'package dependencies'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (documentation syncing) and mentions specific source files (package.json, .env.example), but doesn't list concrete actions like 'updates README', 'generates API docs', or 'validates consistency'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (syncs documentation from source files) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms like 'documentation', 'package.json', '.env.example', but misses common variations users might say like 'docs', 'README', 'sync docs', 'update documentation', or 'keep docs updated'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of specific files like package.json and .env.example provides some distinctiveness, but 'documentation' is broad and could overlap with general doc-writing or README skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 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.
The skill is concise and well-structured but lacks actionability. It describes what documentation to generate without showing concrete examples of the expected output format, table structures, or how to extract and format the information from source files.
Suggestions
Add concrete examples of the expected output format for the scripts reference table and environment variables documentation
Include a sample snippet showing how CONTRIB.md or RUNBOOK.md sections should be structured
Add validation steps to verify generated documentation is complete and accurate (e.g., 'Verify all scripts from package.json appear in the table')
Specify what format 'diff summary' should take and how to present it to the user
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is lean and efficient, listing only the essential steps without explaining concepts Claude already knows. Every line serves a purpose with no padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides only abstract descriptions of what to do ('Generate scripts reference table', 'Document purpose and format') without any concrete examples, code snippets, or specific formats for the output files. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly numbered and sequenced, but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops. No guidance on how to verify the generated documentation is correct or what to do if source files are malformed. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size (~25 lines), the structure is appropriate. It's a clear overview without needing external references, and the content is well-organized into logical steps. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.