frontend-implementation
Frontend Implementation Workflow Agent. Frontend만 구현이 필요한 경우 사용합니다. UI 컴포넌트, 페이지, 상태 관리, API 연동 등을 오케스트레이션합니다.
56
51%
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/frontend-implementation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 adequately covers the 'what' and 'when' aspects with an explicit use-case trigger, which is a strength. However, it relies on somewhat vague orchestration language rather than concrete actions, and the trigger terms could be expanded to include more natural user vocabulary and common frontend technologies.
Suggestions
Replace '오케스트레이션합니다' with specific concrete actions like 'builds UI components', 'implements pages', 'manages state', 'connects APIs'
Add more natural trigger terms users would say, such as specific frameworks (React, Vue), file types (.tsx, .css), or common phrases ('build a form', 'create a button')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Frontend) and lists some actions (UI 컴포넌트, 페이지, 상태 관리, API 연동), but uses vague term '오케스트레이션' (orchestration) rather than concrete specific actions like 'create', 'build', or 'implement'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('UI 컴포넌트, 페이지, 상태 관리, API 연동 등을 오케스트레이션') and when ('Frontend만 구현이 필요한 경우 사용합니다') with an explicit trigger clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'Frontend', 'UI 컴포넌트', '페이지', '상태 관리', 'API 연동', but missing common variations users might say like 'React', 'component', 'styling', 'CSS', or file extensions. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Specifies 'Frontend만' (frontend only) which helps distinguish from full-stack skills, but could still overlap with general UI/component skills or specific framework skills without more precise boundaries. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a clear high-level overview of a frontend implementation workflow with good visual structure and phase organization. However, it lacks actionable, executable guidance—it describes what agents exist and their roles but not how to actually use them or what happens when steps fail. The content reads more like documentation than an actionable skill.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable examples showing how to invoke each agent (e.g., actual command syntax, expected inputs/outputs)
Include validation checkpoints with specific commands to verify each phase completed successfully before proceeding
Add error handling guidance: what to do when Lighthouse scores are below 90, when bundle size exceeds limits, or when tests fail
Convert the '협업 Agent' section into actual links to the referenced skill files for proper progressive disclosure
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient with good use of tables and diagrams, but includes some redundant information (e.g., the workflow diagram and phase tables largely duplicate each other). The Korean labels add context but some sections could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill describes a workflow orchestration process but provides no executable code, concrete commands, or specific implementation details. It lists agents and phases abstractly without showing how to actually invoke them or what they do internally. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The phases are clearly sequenced with parallel/sequential distinctions and a visual diagram. However, there are no validation checkpoints, error handling steps, or feedback loops for when phases fail. The '주의사항' section mentions thresholds but not how to handle failures. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear sections and tables, but it's somewhat monolithic. References to other agents (tech-implementation, backend-implementation, etc.) are mentioned but not linked. The directory structure and patterns could be in separate reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- shaul1991/shaul-agents-plugin
- Commit
9242c58
- 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.