clean-code

This skill embodies the principles of "Clean Code" by Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob). Use it to transform "code that works" into "code that is clean."

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/clean-code/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

53%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 content is a well-organized, self-contained reference of Clean Code principles with concrete naming examples, but it reiterates concepts Claude already knows and offers principles rather than an executable, checkpointed workflow.

Suggestions

Trim restatements of well-known concepts (Law of Demeter, F.I.R.S.T., the code smells list) down to one-line reminders that assume Claude's familiarity.

Convert the implementation checklist into an explicit validate-then-proceed loop so it functions as a real workflow checkpoint rather than a passive list.

Tighten vague directives like 'Functions should be shorter than you think' into concrete thresholds (e.g. the existing 'smaller than 20 lines' checklist item) inline in the Functions section.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is compact and bulleted, but it largely restates concepts Claude already knows (Law of Demeter, TDD, F.I.R.S.T., code smells) with some unnecessary glosses like 'Don't Return Null: It forces the caller to check for null every time', fitting the mostly-efficient-but-could-be-tightened anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete do/don't examples (elapsedTimeInDays vs d, accountList for a Map, postPayment/deletePage) are mixed with vague directives like 'Functions should be shorter than you think', matching the some-concrete-guidance-but-incomplete anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	This is a principles reference rather than a sequenced process; the Three Laws of TDD are ordered and the closing checklist offers a light validation loop, but there is no real multi-step workflow with explicit checkpoints.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is self-contained with no need for external references and is organized into nine clearly headed numbered sections plus a checklist and limitations section; at over 50 lines it sits just below the simple-skill 5-anchor, matching good structure with minor gaps.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

48%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 identifies a clear, recognizable niche (Clean Code principles) but relies on a slogan-like action statement and lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, leaving both specificity and completeness mid-range.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract 'transform code that works into code that is clean' with concrete capabilities such as 'review, refactor, and name functions, classes, and comments according to Clean Code principles'.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when reviewing pull requests, refactoring legacy code, or improving naming and function structure.'

Include natural trigger synonyms users actually say — refactor, code smell, code quality, code review — alongside 'Clean Code'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ("principles of Clean Code") but its only action — "transform code that works into code that is clean" — is an abstract slogan rather than a concrete capability, matching the anchor for minimal/generic actions.	2 / 5
Completeness	A vague 'what' is present, but the 'when' is only weakly implied via "Use it to transform..." with no explicit trigger scenario; the missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3 per the guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Clean Code" and "Uncle Bob" are natural keywords a user might say, but common variations like refactor, code smell, code quality, or code review are missing, fitting the anchor for some relevant keywords with missing synonyms.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Anchoring to a specific book and author gives a clear niche with distinct triggers, with only minor overlap risk against generic refactoring or code-review skills.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Path: skills/clean-code/SKILL.md
Commit: 1f67c44

Reviewed: about 15 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.