bash-defensive-patterns
Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts. Use when writing robust shell scripts, CI/CD pipelines, or system utilities requiring fault tolerance and safety.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill bash-defensive-patternsOverall
score
72%
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
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a reasonably well-constructed description with explicit 'what' and 'when' clauses and good trigger term coverage. The main weakness is that the capabilities described are somewhat abstract ('defensive techniques', 'fault tolerance') rather than listing concrete actions, and it could potentially overlap with general shell scripting or CI/CD skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'validate inputs, implement error handling with trap, use strict mode (set -euo pipefail), quote variables safely'
Strengthen distinctiveness by emphasizing what makes this different from general Bash scripting, e.g., 'for scripts that must not fail silently or cause data loss'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Bash programming, shell scripts) and mentions some contexts (CI/CD pipelines, system utilities), but 'defensive programming techniques' and 'fault tolerance and safety' are somewhat abstract rather than listing concrete actions like 'validate inputs, handle errors, use strict mode'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Master defensive Bash programming techniques for production-grade scripts') and when ('Use when writing robust shell scripts, CI/CD pipelines, or system utilities requiring fault tolerance and safety') with an explicit 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good natural keywords users would say: 'Bash', 'shell scripts', 'CI/CD pipelines', 'system utilities', 'robust', 'fault tolerance', 'safety', 'production-grade'. These cover common variations of how users might describe needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'defensive Bash' and 'fault tolerance' provide some distinction, this could overlap with general Bash/shell scripting skills or CI/CD skills. The niche of 'defensive' programming is somewhat specific but not strongly differentiated from general shell scripting guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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 well-structured and concise, appropriately delegating detailed content to a referenced playbook. However, it critically lacks any concrete, executable examples in the main skill file itself—no code snippets for strict mode, no example trap handlers, no sample validation patterns. This makes the skill abstract rather than immediately actionable.
Suggestions
Add a concrete 'Quick start' code block showing the essential strict mode setup (e.g., `set -euo pipefail`, `trap` for cleanup) that users can immediately copy
Include at least one executable example for input validation or safe file handling to demonstrate the patterns mentioned
Add a validation checkpoint in the workflow, such as 'Run shellcheck on your script before execution' with the specific command
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, avoiding explanations of what Bash is or basic programming concepts. Every section serves a purpose and the instructions are appropriately brief, delegating details to the referenced playbook. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides only vague, abstract guidance with no concrete code examples, commands, or executable snippets. Instructions like 'Enable strict mode' and 'Add logging, error traps' describe rather than instruct with specific implementations. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-step instruction sequence provides a clear order of operations, but lacks validation checkpoints, feedback loops, or specific verification steps. For scripts involving potentially destructive operations, this is insufficient. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill appropriately serves as an overview with clear, one-level-deep references to the implementation playbook. The structure is well-organized with distinct sections for when to use, when not to use, instructions, and safety. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
75%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 12 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_examples | No examples detected (no code fences and no 'Example' wording) | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.