c-pro
Write efficient C code with proper memory management, pointer
47
22%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
90%
1.01xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/c-pro/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%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 description is clearly truncated mid-sentence, rendering it incomplete and ineffective. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause, lists no concrete actions beyond vaguely writing C code, and provides insufficient detail for Claude to reliably select this skill from a pool of alternatives.
Suggestions
Complete the truncated sentence and add specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Writes C code with proper memory allocation/deallocation, pointer arithmetic, struct manipulation, and buffer management').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'C programming', 'malloc', 'free', 'segfault', 'pointer', 'memory leak', '.c files', 'C header files'.
Differentiate from general coding skills by specifying C-unique concerns such as manual memory management, undefined behavior prevention, and systems-level programming.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description mentions 'memory management' and 'pointer' but is clearly truncated and does not list concrete actions. It vaguely references writing C code without specifying what tasks it performs (e.g., debugging, optimization, code generation). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description is truncated and incomplete—it partially addresses 'what' (write C code) but has no 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance. The missing 'Use when...' clause alone would cap this at 2, but the truncation makes even the 'what' portion weak. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'C code', 'memory management', and 'pointer' that users might naturally mention, but the description appears cut off and misses common variations like 'malloc', 'free', 'segfault', 'buffer overflow', or 'C programming'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of C-specific concepts like 'memory management' and 'pointer' provides some distinctiveness from general coding skills, but 'write efficient code' is broad enough to overlap with other programming language skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is mostly a high-level topic outline for C programming rather than actionable guidance. It lacks any concrete code examples, specific commands, or executable patterns that would help Claude produce better C code. The boilerplate sections waste tokens while the domain-specific content remains too abstract to be useful.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable C code examples showing proper memory management patterns (e.g., malloc with error checking, cleanup on failure, a complete small program).
Replace the generic 'Instructions' bullets with a specific workflow: write code → compile with flags → run valgrind → fix issues → re-validate, including actual commands.
Remove the boilerplate 'Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when' sections and the generic instruction bullets ('Clarify goals, constraints...') to save tokens for actionable content.
Show a concrete Makefile snippet and a valgrind invocation command rather than just mentioning them as outputs.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections are boilerplate filler that add no value. The generic instructions ('Clarify goals, constraints...') are things Claude already knows. However, the focus areas and approach sections are reasonably lean. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | No executable code examples, no concrete commands, no specific patterns demonstrated. Everything is described at a high level ('every malloc needs free', 'use static analysis tools') without showing how. The skill reads like a checklist of topics rather than actionable guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Approach' section lists principles rather than a sequenced workflow. There are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops for debugging or memory leak detection, and no clear step-by-step process for writing, compiling, validating, and testing C code. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is a reference to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' for detailed examples, which is good. However, the main content itself is poorly structured—mixing generic boilerplate with domain-specific content—and the reference is buried in a generic instruction bullet rather than clearly signaled in context. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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
e18e63c
- 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.