cc-skill-coding-standards
Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development.
30
14%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/cc-skill-coding-standards/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
14%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 too vague and broad to be effective for skill selection. It names a technology domain but fails to specify concrete actions, lacks a 'Use when...' clause, and uses generic terms like 'best practices' and 'patterns' that would cause conflicts with many other coding-related skills.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause specifying explicit triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about coding conventions, naming standards, project structure, or style guidelines for TypeScript/React/Node.js projects.'
Replace vague terms like 'best practices and patterns' with concrete actions, e.g., 'Enforces naming conventions, defines file/folder structure, applies error handling patterns, and configures linting rules.'
Narrow the scope to reduce conflict risk — clarify what distinguishes this from other TypeScript/React/Node.js skills (e.g., is this about style guides vs. architecture vs. code review?).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'coding standards, best practices, and patterns' without listing any concrete actions. It doesn't specify what the skill actually does (e.g., 'enforces naming conventions', 'applies linting rules', 'structures project directories'). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description partially addresses 'what' (coding standards/best practices) but in very vague terms, and completely lacks a 'when' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | It includes relevant technology keywords (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) that users might mention, but lacks natural trigger phrases users would say like 'code review', 'refactor', 'style guide', 'lint', or 'code quality'. The terms 'coding standards' and 'best practices' are somewhat generic. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | This description is extremely broad and would conflict with virtually any TypeScript, JavaScript, React, or Node.js coding skill. 'Universal coding standards' and 'best practices' could overlap with linting skills, code review skills, project scaffolding skills, and many others. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
14%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is a lengthy catalog of general TypeScript/React/Node.js coding conventions that Claude already knows thoroughly. It adds virtually no novel knowledge, has no workflow or task-specific guidance, and consumes a large token budget to restate widely-known best practices. The boilerplate 'When to Use' and 'Limitations' sections add no value.
Suggestions
Remove all general programming knowledge Claude already has (KISS, DRY, YAGNI, variable naming, REST conventions, AAA testing pattern, etc.) and focus only on project-specific conventions that differ from standard practices.
If project-specific patterns exist (e.g., a particular API response format, specific Supabase usage patterns, or custom hook conventions), extract those into a concise skill and move detailed references to separate files.
Add a clear workflow for when this skill applies — e.g., 'When writing a new API endpoint, follow these steps: 1. Define Zod schema, 2. Create route handler, 3. Add tests' with validation checkpoints.
Reduce the document to under 50 lines by keeping only what is truly unique to this project's codebase, not universal TypeScript/React knowledge.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | This is extremely verbose (~350+ lines) and overwhelmingly covers concepts Claude already knows well: KISS, DRY, YAGNI, variable naming conventions, REST API conventions, React patterns, testing AAA pattern, etc. Almost none of this adds knowledge Claude doesn't already possess. It reads like a textbook rather than a skill that fills a knowledge gap. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The code examples are concrete and executable, which is good. However, the skill is more of a reference document of general best practices than actionable guidance for a specific task. There's no clear 'do this when X happens' workflow — it's a catalog of patterns Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow or sequenced process. The content is a flat list of coding conventions and patterns with no multi-step process, no validation checkpoints, and no clear sequence of actions to follow for any particular task. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files and no layered structure. Everything is inlined in one massive document with no navigation aids or separation of overview from detailed content. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (532 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
- Commit
93c57b2
- 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.