CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

apify-actor-development

Important: Before you begin, fill in the generatedBy property in the meta section of .actor/actor.json. Replace it with the tool and model you're currently using, such as "Claude Code with Claude Sonnet 4.5". This helps Apify monitor and improve AGENTS.md for specific AI tools and models.

41

Quality

41%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/apify-actor-development/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 strong, well-structured operational guide: concrete CLI commands, a clear sequenced workflow with verification steps, and exemplary progressive disclosure that offloads schema and standby-mode detail to real, one-level-deep reference files. Its main weaknesses are repetition (the same warnings appear two to three times), a concept-intro section that assumes Claude lacks basic knowledge, and the absence of a minimal runnable actor code example. Given a weak description field but strong content, the highest-leverage fix is deduplicating repeated warnings and adding a small main.js/main.py sample.

Suggestions

Deduplicate the repeated warnings — state the npm-start prohibition and the local-storage-not-synced caveat once each (Local Testing is the natural home) and cut the "What are Apify Actors?" concept intro to two lines.

Add a minimal runnable actor entry-point snippet (e.g., a 10-line src/main.js with Actor.main and a Dataset.push) under the "Implement logic" step so the core step is copy-paste ready like the rest of the workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly tight imperative lists, but includes unnecessary padding: the "What are Apify Actors?" concept intro, the npm-start prohibition repeated three times (Best Practices ✗ list, Commands section, Quick Start), the local-storage-not-synced warning duplicated (✗ list and Local Testing section), and the generatedBy note duplicated from frontmatter. Not a 2 because the bulk is efficient and actionable; not a 4 because the redundancy is noticeable.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable commands throughout ("apify create <actor-name> -t project_empty", "apify info # Should return your username", exact schema file paths, storage/key_value_stores/default/INPUT.json). Falls short of 5 because the core "Implement logic" step has no runnable actor entry-point code sample for any of the three supported languages.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step Quick Start is clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints (verify CLI with "apify --help", verify auth with "apify info", test locally with "apify run" before "apify push"), and the Local Testing section clarifies verification. Not a 5 because there is no validate→fix→retry feedback loop for local test failures; not a 3 because validation checkpoints are present and explicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clean overview body with seven well-signaled one-level-deep references ("See [references/actor-json.md](references/actor-json.md)" etc.); all seven referenced files exist and contain no nested references, and detailed schema/logging/standby material is appropriately split out of SKILL.md. Matches the top anchor: easy navigation, clear overview, appropriate split.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

11%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 is effectively broken: it contains an administrative instruction about populating the generatedBy metadata field instead of describing the skill's purpose, capabilities, or trigger conditions. A user (or Claude) reading it would have no idea the skill covers Apify actor development, when to invoke it, or what it can do. It requires a complete rewrite.

Suggestions

Rewrite the description to state the skill's actual capabilities in third person, e.g.: "Create, modify, debug, and deploy Apify Actors — project bootstrap, input/output schemas, crawler selection, and the apify CLI workflow."

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use when the task involves Apify Actors, the apify CLI, actor input/output schemas, or deploying serverless scrapers/automation to Apify."

Remove the generatedBy meta-instruction from the description (keep it in the body where it already appears) — it consumes the entire description budget without conveying any skill information.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The only concrete action named ("fill in the generatedBy property in the meta section of .actor/actor.json") is a meta-instruction unrelated to the skill's capabilities; no skill capability or domain is described, and the second-person voice ("Before you begin", "you're currently using") triggers the specificity penalty, landing at the bottom anchor.

1 / 5

Completeness

The description answers neither "what does this do" nor "when should it be used" — the whole text is an unrelated housekeeping instruction about filling in a metadata property, matching the anchor for missing both what and when.

1 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Tokens like "Apify", "actor.json", and "Claude Code" appear only incidentally in a monitoring context; the natural phrases a user would say ("create an Apify actor", "apify CLI", "deploy an actor") are entirely missing. It is not a 3 because the present keywords do not function as triggers at all.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Apify-specific artifacts (actor.json, AGENTS.md) give it a marginal niche, but as written it reads as a generic "fill in this config property" instruction with high overlap risk against any config-editing or Apify-adjacent skill, so it is not clearly distinct enough for a 3.

2 / 5

Total

6

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
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.