CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

coding-principles

Language-agnostic coding principles for maintainability, readability, and quality. Use when implementing features, refactoring code, or reviewing code quality.

41

Quality

40%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/coding-principles/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

20%

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

This skill reads like a generic software engineering textbook rather than a targeted skill file. It restates widely-known principles (SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, error handling basics, security fundamentals) that Claude already understands deeply, consuming significant context window budget without adding novel, actionable guidance. The near-total absence of concrete, executable examples and the monolithic structure significantly reduce its utility.

Suggestions

Remove or drastically condense sections covering well-known principles (DRY, SOLID, single responsibility, basic error handling, basic security) — Claude already knows these. Focus only on project-specific conventions or non-obvious decisions.

Add concrete, executable code examples for each key principle — e.g., show a before/after refactoring, a specific parameterized query pattern, or a concrete dependency injection example in at least one language.

Split the monolithic document into a concise overview SKILL.md (~50 lines) that links to topic-specific reference files (e.g., security-checks.md, refactoring-patterns.md, function-design.md).

Ensure referenced files like 'references/security-checks.md' actually exist in the bundle, or remove the reference.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is extremely verbose (~300+ lines) and largely restates principles Claude already knows well (SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, single responsibility, early returns, etc.). Much of the content is generic software engineering wisdom that adds no novel information. The 'Minimum Surface for Required Coverage' principle in particular is overwrought. Sections like 'Security Principles' and 'Testing Considerations' rehash well-known concepts without adding project-specific value.

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill is almost entirely abstract guidance with no executable code, no concrete commands, and only one trivial pseudocode example (createUser). Instructions like 'Use parameterized queries' and 'Write testable code from the start' are vague directives Claude already understands. There are no copy-paste-ready examples, no specific tool invocations, and no concrete patterns to follow.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 'Reference Representativeness' section provides a reasonable IF/THEN decision workflow, and the refactoring section mentions small steps and maintaining working state. However, most sections lack clear sequencing or validation checkpoints. The security section references 'references/security-checks.md' for detection patterns but provides no verification workflow.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is a monolithic wall of text with many sections that could be split into separate reference files. There is one reference to 'references/security-checks.md' but no bundle files are provided, so it's a broken reference. The document would benefit from being an overview that points to detailed topic files rather than inlining everything.

2 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

59%

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 has good structural completeness with both 'what' and 'when' clauses, but suffers from being too generic and abstract. The capabilities described are high-level principles rather than concrete actions, and the trigger terms are so broad ('implementing features', 'refactoring code') that this skill would likely conflict with many other coding-related skills in a large skill library.

Suggestions

Narrow the scope and add specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Applies naming conventions, function decomposition, DRY/SOLID principles, and complexity reduction techniques.'

Make trigger terms more distinctive to reduce conflict risk, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about clean code practices, coding standards, code smells, or general best practices not tied to a specific language or framework.'

Add differentiating language to clarify this is for general/cross-language guidance, e.g., 'Use instead of language-specific skills when the question is about universal code quality principles.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (coding principles) and some qualities (maintainability, readability, quality), but does not list specific concrete actions like 'enforce naming conventions, reduce cyclomatic complexity, apply SOLID principles.' The actions mentioned (implementing, refactoring, reviewing) are in the trigger clause rather than capability descriptions.

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (language-agnostic coding principles for maintainability, readability, and quality) and 'when' (implementing features, refactoring code, or reviewing code quality) with an explicit 'Use when...' clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant terms like 'refactoring', 'code quality', 'implementing features', and 'readability', but misses many natural variations users might say such as 'clean code', 'best practices', 'code review', 'code smell', 'technical debt', or 'coding standards'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Very generic and would likely conflict with many other coding-related skills. 'Implementing features' and 'refactoring code' are extremely broad triggers that could overlap with virtually any language-specific or framework-specific coding skill.

1 / 3

Total

8

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
shinpr/claude-code-workflows
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.