charset

Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Declare UTF-8 character encoding. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.

Quality

68%

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/charset/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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 body is a well-structured, lean overview that delegates details cleanly to one real reference file, with concrete actionable fix guidance and a clear review sequence. Its main weakness is redundancy between the Quick Reference, Check, and Fix sections that could be consolidated.

Suggestions

Collapse the Check and Fix sections into the Quick Reference (or make Check a concrete inspection step and Fix the single canonical tag snippet) to remove the near-duplicate guidance.

Add one explicit re-verification line in Fix (e.g. 'Confirm <meta charset> is the first <head> child and within the first 1024 bytes') to close the workflow loop.

Inline a minimal complete HTML snippet showing the tag in context so the body is copy-paste ready without opening references/rule.md.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and avoids over-explaining basics, but the Check section restates the Quick Reference and the Fix section near-duplicates the first Quick Reference bullet. That noticeable redundancy keeps it at 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than a 4.	3 / 5
Actionability	Gives concrete, specific guidance ('Add <meta charset="UTF-8"> as the first element in <head>', 'within the first 1024 bytes') that is essentially copy-paste ready. Not a 5 because the complete code example covering common cases is delegated to references/rule.md rather than shown inline.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear Check -> Fix -> Code Review sequence with an implicit verify checkpoint via the Check section; as a non-destructive single-purpose review skill it is not subject to the validation cap. Minor gap: no explicit re-verification step after applying the fix, so it sits below the explicit-feedback-loop 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with well-organized sections and a single clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md') for full implementation details and code examples; the referenced file exists. Matches the clear-overview-with-one-level-deep-references anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 answers both what and when with an explicit 'Use when' clause and natural trigger terms, but the action set is thin and the frontend-review trigger wording creates real overlap risk with sibling HTML-checklist skills. Tightening the trigger to charset-specific phrases would raise distinctiveness and completeness.

Suggestions

Lead with the concrete action and rule scope before the 'Use when' clause, e.g. 'Verify the document declares <meta charset="UTF-8"> early in <head>. Use when reviewing HTML for charset/encoding issues, mojibake, or missing UTF-8 declaration.'

Add charset-specific trigger synonyms ('charset', 'character encoding', 'mojibake', 'garbled text') so the description matches phrases users actually say.

Narrow the 'when' clause to charset concerns rather than generic 'reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' to reduce overlap with sibling frontend-review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (UTF-8 charset) and 1-2 concrete actions ('reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components', 'Validate the final browser-facing markup'), matching the anchor for naming a domain with a couple of actions. Not a 4 because it lists only review/validate rather than several specific actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'when' ('Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components...') and 'what' ('Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction'). The 'what' is a single somewhat thin action, so it sits just below the fully concrete 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say ('templates, rendered HTML, shared components', 'UTF-8 character encoding') but misses common variations like 'charset' or 'mojibake'. Fits good-coverage-with-a-few-missing anchor rather than the comprehensive anchor at 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The charset-specific qualifier gives it a niche, but the trigger 'reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' is broad frontend territory that would overlap with sibling HTML-review skills. Fits 'somewhat specific but could still overlap' rather than the mostly-distinct 4.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 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/charset/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 8 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.