browser-caching

Use when auditing slow page loads, heavy assets, or rendering delays related to Enable browser caching. Verify the actual bottleneck in DevTools, Lighthouse, or field data before recommending changes.

Quality

70%

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/browser-caching/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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.

A well-structured, lean overview that uses progressive disclosure effectively by pushing code and framework specifics to a single clearly referenced file. Its weakness is that the body itself offers little executable guidance and no explicit validation checkpoints in its Check/Fix workflow.

Suggestions

Inline at least one minimal executable Cache-Control example in the Fix section so the body is actionable without opening the reference, or add a one-line "see references/rule.md for copy-paste configs" pointer in the Fix section.

Add an explicit verification checkpoint to the workflow (e.g. after Fix: "Confirm headers in DevTools Network tab — cached assets show '(disk cache)' before considering the change done").

Trim or repurpose the opening concept-explanation sentence into an actionable directive to lift conciseness from good to lean.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with terse Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections and a useful Quick Reference, but the opening sentence ("Proper caching eliminates redundant downloads on repeat visits...") explains a concept Claude already knows and could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	The Quick Reference gives specific directives (e.g. "1 year max-age", "stale-while-revalidate") but the body itself contains no executable code—all concrete examples are deferred to references/rule.md, leaving the Fix section as a high-level instruction ("Configure appropriate Cache-Control and ETag headers").	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review implies a loose sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints; the Code Review nod to "describe the measurement method used to confirm the issue" is only an implicit checkpoint.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview that defers full implementation details to a single, clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ("see references/rule.md"), which exists as a real file, with well-organized sections for easy navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

75%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.

A strong description that explicitly pairs a "Use when" trigger with a concrete verification action and named tooling. It is held back from top marks by slightly awkward integration of the rule name and minor gaps in action and keyword coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions—"auditing slow page loads, heavy assets, or rendering delays" and "Verify the actual bottleneck in DevTools, Lighthouse, or field data before recommending changes"—with named tools, though it stops short of the caching-specific actions (header configuration).	4 / 5
Completeness	Both "what" (verify the bottleneck with named tools before recommending changes) and "when" (explicit "Use when..." trigger) are answered concretely, but the awkward "related to Enable browser caching" phrasing keeps it just below the clean 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural performance phrases users would say ("slow page loads", "heavy assets", "rendering delays", "DevTools", "Lighthouse") are present, but a few common variants like "cache headers" or "repeat visits" are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The caching-audit niche with named measurement tools is mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against broader performance-audit skills.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
Path: skills/browser-caching/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 5 days 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.