coding-standards

tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill coding-standards

Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development.

54%

Overall

Validation — 63%

Implementation — 57%

Activation — 33%

SKILL.md

Review

Evals

Validation

63%

Warnings & errors only

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (522 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
description_trigger_hint	Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...')	Warning
metadata_version	'metadata' field is not a dictionary	Warning
license_field	'license' field is missing	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
body_steps	No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow	Warning

	Total	10 / 16 Passed

Implementation

57%

This skill provides highly actionable code examples with clear good/bad comparisons, making it immediately useful for implementation. However, it's overly verbose by explaining fundamental programming concepts Claude already knows (DRY, KISS, YAGNI), and the monolithic structure makes it token-inefficient. The lack of progressive disclosure and explicit workflow guidance limits its effectiveness as a reference document.

Suggestions

Remove explanations of universal concepts (KISS, DRY, YAGNI, 'Code is read more than written') - Claude knows these; keep only the project-specific implementations

Split into multiple files: SKILL.md as overview with links to TYPESCRIPT.md, REACT.md, API.md, TESTING.md for detailed standards

Add a code review checklist or workflow section with explicit validation steps (e.g., 'Before committing: 1. Run linter, 2. Check for magic numbers, 3. Verify types')

Condense the good/bad examples - many patterns (like variable naming) could be shown in a single compact table rather than multiple code blocks

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	While the content uses good code examples and avoids excessive prose, it explains many concepts Claude already knows (KISS, DRY, YAGNI principles, basic React patterns). The document is comprehensive but could be significantly tighter by removing explanations of universal programming concepts.	2 / 3
Actionability	Excellent executable code examples throughout with clear ✅/❌ patterns showing good vs bad approaches. Code snippets are copy-paste ready with proper TypeScript types, and specific patterns like the AAA testing structure are immediately usable.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The content is organized by topic but lacks explicit workflow sequences. For a standards document, there's no clear process for applying these standards (e.g., code review checklist, validation steps). The 'Code Smell Detection' section hints at a review process but doesn't provide explicit steps.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	This is a monolithic 400+ line document with no references to external files for detailed topics. API design, testing, React patterns, and performance could each be separate files. No navigation structure or links to deeper documentation are provided.	1 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Activation

33%

The description identifies its technology domain clearly but suffers from vague capability language ('standards, best practices, patterns') without concrete actions. The complete absence of a 'Use when...' clause significantly weakens its utility for skill selection, and the generic nature of 'best practices' creates potential overlap with other coding-related skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger scenarios like 'Use when reviewing code style, asking about conventions, structuring React components, or seeking TypeScript/JavaScript best practices'

Replace vague terms like 'best practices and patterns' with specific actions such as 'enforce naming conventions, structure React components, configure ESLint rules, apply type safety patterns'

Include natural user phrases as triggers: 'code review', 'style guide', 'how should I organize', 'is this the right way to'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) and mentions 'coding standards, best practices, and patterns' but doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'enforce naming conventions', 'apply linting rules', or 'structure components'.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what (coding standards and best practices for specific technologies) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit guidance on when Claude should select this skill. The rubric caps completeness at 2 for missing 'Use when', and this is weak enough to warrant a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant technology keywords (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) that users would mention, but lacks natural trigger phrases users might say like 'code review', 'style guide', 'conventions', 'how should I structure', or 'best way to write'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The technology stack (TypeScript, JavaScript, React, Node.js) provides some specificity, but 'coding standards' and 'best practices' are generic enough to potentially conflict with other code-related skills or language-specific skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Reviewed

17 days ago

Table of Contents

Validation Implementation Activation

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.