direction-attribute

Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Set text direction for RTL languages. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.

Quality

71%

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/direction-attribute/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%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 SKILL.md body is a well-structured, token-efficient overview that appropriately offloads detailed code and framework guidance to references/rule.md. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: the review process is implied by section names rather than presented as an explicit, sequenced procedure with verification steps.

Suggestions

Convert the Check → Fix → Code Review flow into an explicit numbered sequence with a verification step (e.g., '4. Re-render and confirm dir/lang pairing in the browser') to add a checkpoint.

Trim or relocate the opening consequence sentence ('Without proper dir attributes...') since it explains a concept Claude already knows.

Add one small inline code snippet (e.g., `<html lang="ar" dir="rtl">` or `<bdi>`) so the most common fix is copy-paste ready without opening the reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with well-organized Quick Reference bullets and short Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections that assume Claude's competence; only the opening 'Without proper dir attributes...' consequence sentence is mild over-explanation that could be trimmed, fitting anchor 4 over 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, executable guidance is present — 'Set dir="rtl" on <html> for Arabic, Hebrew, Persian, Urdu', 'Use dir="auto" for user-generated content', 'Use <bdi>...for mixed-direction inline content' — with only minor gaps (no inline code examples, which are deferred to the reference), matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections imply a rough review sequence but there is no explicit ordering, numbered steps, or validation checkpoints, matching anchor 3 ('sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit').	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with clear sections and a single, well-signaled one-level-deep pointer ('For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md') to a real bundle file, matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 scopes a niche review skill with an explicit 'Use when' trigger and concrete review/validate actions. It is strong on trigger terms and distinctiveness but slightly under-specified on the breadth of concrete actions and could separate 'what' from 'when' more sharply.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete 'what' clause (e.g., 'Reviews rendered HTML for correct dir attributes and bidi isolation') before the 'Use when' clause so the action is distinct from the trigger.

Add 1-2 more concrete actions or natural synonyms (e.g., 'text direction', 'Arabic/Hebrew', 'dir="auto"') to lift specificity and trigger-term coverage toward comprehensive.

Tighten 'related to Set text direction for RTL languages' — the phrase 'Set text direction' reads as a leftover rule title rather than natural user language.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Set text direction for RTL languages') and two concrete actions — 'reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' and 'Validate the final browser-facing markup' — but stops at ~2 actions rather than comprehensive coverage, matching anchor 3.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (review/validate rendered markup for RTL direction) and 'when' ('Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components...') are present and explicit, but the 'what' leans on the 'when' clause and could be more sharply stated, matching anchor 4 over 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say ('RTL languages', 'templates', 'rendered HTML', 'shared components', 'browser-facing markup') with good coverage, though it omits common synonyms like specific language names or 'text direction' phrasing, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The RTL/text-direction niche is clear and the trigger ('reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Set text direction for RTL languages') is fairly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against general HTML-review skills, fitting anchor 4.	4 / 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

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

Reviewed: 22 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.