empty-heading

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Ensure headings contain text. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

Quality

73%

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/empty-heading/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

70%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is a clean, well-structured overview with good progressive disclosure and a clear simple workflow, but it spends tokens restating known concepts and defers all concrete examples to the reference, leaving the body's guidance somewhat thin.

Suggestions

Drop or trim the introductory 'ghost stops' explanation since Claude already understands why empty headings are problematic, and merge the meta 'Explain' section into the Fix or Code Review guidance.

Add one short inline good/bad heading example (e.g., '<h1>Product Specifications</h1>' vs '<h2></h2>') so the overview is actionable without requiring the reference.

Name a concrete verification tool inline (e.g., 'check the accessibility tree or run axe/Lighthouse') in the Code Review section rather than only gesturing at 'browser accessibility tooling'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient, but the intro ('Empty headings create ghost stops in the document outline, confusing users...') explains a concept Claude already knows and the 'Explain' section is meta/redundant, so it could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	'Check' and 'Fix' give concrete instructions, but the body carries no inline examples or specific tool commands (the good/bad HTML and validation tooling live only in the reference), leaving key details out of the overview.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	As a simple single-purpose skill it presents a clear Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence with verification noted in the Code Review section, which the simple-skills note allows to score 3.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview that clearly signals a one-level-deep reference to 'references/rule.md' (verified to exist) for full details and examples, matching the well-signaled one-level reference anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

77%

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 explicit triggers and concrete actions, but its trigger terms are technical rather than naturally user-spoken and its broad accessibility-review framing risks overlapping with sibling skills.

Suggestions

Add natural user-facing trigger terms such as 'empty headings', 'headings with no text', or 'screen reader skips headings' so it matches how users actually phrase the need.

Narrow the review scope to heading content specifically (e.g., 'Check heading elements for empty or non-perceivable text') to reduce overlap with general accessibility-review skills.

Lead with the skill's core action (finding and fixing empty headings) before the broader accessibility-review framing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), matching the 'multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the partial-coverage anchor below.	3 / 3
Completeness	An explicit 'Use when reviewing...' clause supplies the when, and the checking actions supply the what, satisfying both halves clearly rather than leaving the trigger implied.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms lean technical ('rendered HTML', 'interactive components', 'design-system patterns') and omit natural user phrasings like 'empty headings' or 'headings with no text', so coverage is partial rather than good.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Although the rule name is given, the bulk is generic accessibility-review language (keyboard behavior, focus flow, screen-reader output) that overlaps heavily with other accessibility skills rather than carving a distinct niche.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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/empty-heading/SKILL.md
Commit: 48405aa

Reviewed: about 9 hours 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.