web-quality-audit
Comprehensive web quality audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, and best practices in a single review. Use when asked to "audit my site", "review web quality", "run lighthouse audit", "check page quality", or "optimize my website" across multiple areas at once. Orchestrates specialized skills for depth. Do NOT use for single-area audits — prefer core-web-vitals, web-accessibility, seo, or web-best-practices for focused work.
77
71%
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 ./packages/skills-catalog/skills/(quality)/web-quality-audit/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
100%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 is an excellent skill description that hits all the marks. It clearly defines what the skill does (multi-area web quality audit), when to use it (with natural trigger phrases), and critically, when NOT to use it (single-area audits), explicitly naming the alternative skills. The description is concise, uses third person voice, and provides strong disambiguation from related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete areas covered (performance, accessibility, SEO, best practices) and describes the action as a comprehensive audit covering all areas in a single review. Also clarifies it orchestrates specialized skills and distinguishes from single-area audits. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (comprehensive web quality audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, and best practices) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger phrases). Also includes a 'Do NOT use' clause that further clarifies appropriate usage boundaries. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes excellent natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'audit my site', 'review web quality', 'run lighthouse audit', 'check page quality', 'optimize my website'. These cover a wide range of natural phrasings. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Explicitly distinguishes itself from related single-area skills (core-web-vitals, web-accessibility, seo, web-best-practices) and clearly defines its niche as multi-area audits. The 'Do NOT use' clause actively prevents conflict with those specialized skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a comprehensive web development reference guide than a focused skill for Claude. Its biggest weakness is extreme verbosity — it restates widely known web best practices at length rather than providing novel, project-specific instructions that Claude wouldn't already know. The progressive disclosure and output format template are strengths, but the lack of executable code examples and validation steps limits its practical utility.
Suggestions
Drastically reduce the audit categories section — Claude already knows what LCP, alt text, HTTPS, and meta descriptions are. Instead, focus on the specific audit methodology, thresholds, and decision logic unique to this skill.
Add concrete, executable examples of how to actually run audits (e.g., Lighthouse CLI commands, axe-core integration code) rather than just listing what to check.
Add validation checkpoints to the workflow — e.g., 'Run Lighthouse CI and confirm all scores > 90 before proceeding to detailed manual review' — to create a proper feedback loop.
Move the detailed per-category checklists into a separate reference file and keep SKILL.md focused on the orchestration workflow and output format.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | This skill is extremely verbose at ~150+ lines, largely restating well-known web development best practices that Claude already knows (what LCP is, what alt text is, what HTTPS is, etc.). Nearly every bullet point explains a concept Claude is already deeply familiar with rather than providing novel, project-specific guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured checklists and a clear output format template, which is somewhat actionable. However, it lacks executable code examples for fixes (despite claiming to 'Include code examples for fixes'), and most guidance is descriptive rather than providing concrete commands or copy-paste-ready solutions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-step 'How it works' section outlines a sequence, and the output format provides a clear reporting structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops for error recovery, and no guidance on what tools to actually run or how to verify findings. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill has a clear overview structure with well-organized sections and ends with clearly signaled one-level-deep references to specialized skills for Performance, Core Web Vitals, Accessibility, SEO, and Best Practices. Navigation is straightforward. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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.
- Repository
- tech-leads-club/agent-skills
- Commit
81e7e0d
- 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.