code-review
Code review practices emphasizing technical rigor, evidence-based claims, and verification. Use when receiving code review feedback, completing tasks requiring review, or before making completion claims.
82
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
67%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 has good completeness with explicit 'Use when' triggers, but lacks specificity in concrete actions and could benefit from more natural trigger terms users would actually say. The domain is reasonably distinct but some trigger conditions are broad enough to potentially conflict with other skills.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions like 'verify test coverage, check error handling, validate edge cases, ensure documentation accuracy'
Include additional natural trigger terms users would say: 'PR review', 'pull request', 'review my code', 'check my changes', 'code feedback'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (code review) and mentions some actions like 'technical rigor, evidence-based claims, and verification', but doesn't list concrete specific actions like 'check for null handling, verify test coverage, validate error handling'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (code review practices emphasizing technical rigor, evidence-based claims, verification) and when (receiving code review feedback, completing tasks requiring review, before making completion claims) with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'code review' and 'review feedback' which are relevant keywords, but misses common variations users might say like 'PR review', 'pull request', 'review my code', 'check my changes', or 'feedback on code'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'code review' is somewhat specific, the phrase 'completing tasks requiring review' is broad and could overlap with other skills. The emphasis on 'evidence-based claims' and 'verification' helps distinguish it but could still conflict with general coding or testing skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill that efficiently communicates code review practices with good progressive disclosure. The decision tree format is particularly effective for quick reference. The main weakness is the lack of concrete, executable examples - particularly for CI verification commands which would benefit from copy-paste ready snippets.
Suggestions
Add specific CI command examples in the CI Verification section (e.g., `npm run ci`, `make check`, or project-specific commands)
Include a concrete example of what 'stating claim WITH evidence' looks like in practice
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, using bullet points and a decision tree to convey information without unnecessary explanation. No concepts are over-explained; Claude's competence is assumed throughout. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides clear guidance on when to use each practice and a useful decision tree, but lacks concrete executable examples. The CI Verification section mentions running checks but doesn't provide specific commands or code snippets. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision tree provides clear sequencing for different situations. The CI Verification section includes an implicit validation checkpoint (verify all checks pass before proceeding). The workflow is unambiguous for each scenario. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with a concise overview and clear one-level-deep references to detailed protocols in the references folder. Navigation is well-signaled with descriptive links. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.