emcn-design-review

Review UI code for alignment with the emcn design system — components, tokens, patterns, and conventions

Quality

69%

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 ./.agents/skills/emcn-design-review/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

76%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 concise, dense, and highly actionable with concrete tokens, paths, and variant mappings, but its workflow lacks a validation/verification checkpoint for the default destructive/batch apply behavior, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation step to the workflow, e.g. after applying fixes re-run the analysis (or lint/typecheck) and confirm the diff before finishing, to satisfy the destructive/batch feedback-loop requirement.

Include one short worked before/after example (raw button + hardcoded color refactored to emcn component + CSS variable token) to push actionability to 5.

Consider moving the full token catalog and variant tables into a reference file referenced from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and dense — tables, exact token lists, and terse rules — with only one brief justified context line about the stack, matching anchor 5 (every token earns its place).	5 / 5
Actionability	Highly concrete guidance with exact import paths, token names, variant mappings, and icon sizes throughout, but it lacks a complete worked before/after example block, fitting anchor 4 with minor gaps.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps are clearly sequenced (read barrel, read globals.css, analyze, apply/propose fixes), but with fix=true as the default and scope able to be 'whole codebase', this is a batch/destructive operation with no validation/verification checkpoint, capping workflow clarity at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clear sections (Imports, Design Tokens, Buttons, Badges, Icons, Anti-patterns) with inline backtick references to repo paths and no nested references, but it is a single ~80-line file with no separate reference files, fitting anchor 4.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 clearly states what the skill does and is highly distinct, but omits explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance and lacks natural user-phrase synonyms, which caps completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases, e.g. 'Use when reviewing UI code, checking components/tokens against the emcn design system, or auditing a diff for design-system compliance'.

Include natural user phrasings and synonyms in the description such as 'design review', 'check my UI', or 'design-system audit' to improve trigger-term coverage.

Consider naming a couple of distinct actions (e.g. 'review and fix UI code') to lift specificity toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('UI code', 'emcn design system') and several concrete review targets — 'components, tokens, patterns, and conventions' — but offers a single action (review) rather than multiple distinct actions, fitting anchor 4.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated (review UI against emcn) but there is no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the judging guideline completeness is capped at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant design-system vocabulary ('UI code', 'design system', 'components', 'tokens', 'patterns') is present but common natural user phrasings and synonyms are missing, matching anchor 3.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Tied to the named custom 'emcn' library with distinct, niche triggers, giving minimal conflict risk with other skills per anchor 5.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 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: simstudioai/sim
Path: .agents/skills/emcn-design-review/SKILL.md
Commit: 804a452

Reviewed: 4 minutes 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.