browser-extension-builder
Expert in building browser extensions that solve real problems - Chrome, Firefox, and cross-browser extensions. Covers extension architecture, manifest v3, content scripts, popup UIs, monetization strategies, and Chrome Web Store publishing.
46
48%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/browser-extension-builder/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
54%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 strong trigger terms and occupies a clear niche in browser extension development, making it distinctive and keyword-rich. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and reads more like a topic overview than a list of concrete actions Claude can perform. The use of 'Expert in' as an opener is slightly informal/first-person-adjacent but not strictly first or second person.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about building, debugging, or publishing browser extensions, or mentions Chrome extensions, manifest files, or content scripts.'
Replace the topic-listing style ('Covers extension architecture, manifest v3...') with concrete action verbs, e.g., 'Scaffolds extension projects, configures manifest v3, creates content scripts and popup UIs, guides Chrome Web Store publishing.'
Remove 'Expert in' opener and rephrase in third-person action voice, e.g., 'Builds browser extensions for Chrome, Firefox, and cross-browser compatibility.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (browser extensions) and lists several relevant topics like 'manifest v3', 'content scripts', 'popup UIs', 'monetization strategies', and 'Chrome Web Store publishing', but these read more like topic areas than concrete actions. It says 'Covers' rather than listing specific actions like 'create', 'debug', 'configure'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | While the 'what' is partially addressed (building browser extensions, covering various topics), there is no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is more of a topic list than clear capability description, bringing it closer to 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'browser extensions', 'Chrome', 'Firefox', 'cross-browser', 'manifest v3', 'content scripts', 'popup UIs', 'Chrome Web Store'. These cover many common terms a user would use when asking about extension development. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Browser extension development is a clear, distinct niche. Terms like 'manifest v3', 'content scripts', 'Chrome Web Store publishing' are highly specific to this domain and unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides good, executable code examples for core extension development tasks (manifest v3, content scripts, storage, messaging), which is its primary strength. However, it suffers from significant verbosity with redundant sections (expertise/capabilities lists, role description, collaboration workflows) and lacks proper content organization—everything is crammed into one file with no progressive disclosure. The validation checks are useful but disconnected from any development workflow with feedback loops.
Suggestions
Remove redundant sections: merge 'Expertise' and 'Capabilities' into a single brief list or eliminate entirely, as they duplicate the description and the actual content demonstrates these capabilities.
Extract detailed code examples (content scripts, storage patterns, monetization) into separate referenced files, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with links to each topic.
Add an explicit development workflow with validation checkpoints: e.g., 1) Create manifest → 2) Load unpacked in chrome://extensions → 3) Check for manifest errors → 4) Add content script → 5) Test on target page → 6) Check console for chrome.runtime.lastError.
Remove or drastically shorten the 'Collaboration', 'Delegation Triggers', and 'When to Use' sections, which consume tokens without providing actionable extension-building guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Significant verbosity: the 'Role' description, 'Expertise' list, and 'Capabilities' list are redundant with each other and with the description. Sections like 'Collaboration', 'Delegation Triggers', workflow descriptions, and 'When to Use' add substantial token cost with little actionable value. The monetization section explains basic business concepts Claude already knows. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides fully executable code examples throughout: complete manifest.json, working content scripts, storage API usage with async/await wrappers, UI injection code, and payment integration patterns. These are copy-paste ready and cover the key extension development tasks. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The high-level workflows (Productivity Extension, AI Browser Assistant) list steps but lack validation checkpoints. There's no explicit testing/debugging workflow for extension development (e.g., loading unpacked extension, checking for errors, reloading). The validation checks section lists common issues but isn't integrated into a sequential development workflow with feedback loops. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic wall of text with no bundle files to reference. All content—architecture, content scripts, storage, monetization, validation, collaboration—is inlined in a single file. There are no references to separate files for detailed topics, and the document is well over 200 lines with no clear navigation structure beyond flat headings. | 1 / 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 |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
- Commit
fb2efea
- 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.