immutable-patterns

Use when reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior related to Prefer immutable data patterns. Inspect both source code and the browser execution path so fixes target the real bottleneck or bug.

Quality

64%

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/immutable-patterns/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

61%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 well-structured and token-efficient with a clean one-level reference pointer, but its guidance stays high-level and lacks the executable examples and explicit validation checkpoints that would make it fully actionable as a review workflow.

Suggestions

Move concrete immutable-pattern code examples (spread copies, map/filter/reduce, Object.freeze) into the body or a clearly-signaled section so guidance is executable, not just descriptive.

Inline a short validation/verification checklist (browser behavior check, DevTools inspection, primary flow + edge case) so the review workflow has explicit checkpoints rather than burying them in references.

Remove the duplicated 'Mutating shared objects…' opening paragraph from the body since it is repeated verbatim in references/rule.md, leaving the overview to point outward.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with short directive sections and no padding, but the opening 'Mutating shared objects makes it impossible to track…' paragraph explains a concept Claude already knows and is duplicated verbatim in references/rule.md, keeping it just below the 5-anchor.	4 / 5
Actionability	Check and Fix give directive but high-level guidance ('Flag direct property assignments and push/splice', 'Replace in-place mutations with immutable patterns using spread operators') without concrete executable examples in the body, matching the 3-anchor 'some concrete guidance but incomplete'.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sections form a rough review sequence and Code Review mentions browser verification, but explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops are absent (the Verification checklist lives only in references), fitting the 3-anchor 'steps present but checkpoints missing or implicit'.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There is a clear, well-signaled one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md explaining what it contains, and the bundle path is real, but content duplication between the body and the reference (identical title and opening paragraph) leaves minor organization gaps, placing it at 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

67%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 conveys what the skill does and when to use it with an explicit trigger clause, but the trigger terms lean toward review-process jargon rather than the natural phrasings a user would say when reaching for an immutability skill.

Suggestions

Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions immutable data, state mutation, Redux/Zustand updates, or accidental object/array mutation.'

Tighten the 'what' to name the concrete immutable operations the skill performs (spread copies, non-mutating array methods, Object.freeze) rather than only the review framing.

Narrow the broad 'reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior' scope to reduce overlap with generic frontend review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete review actions ('reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior', 'Inspect both source code and the browser execution path') with only minor gaps in coverage, matching the 4-anchor better than the 3-anchor's '1-2 concrete actions'.	4 / 5
Completeness	Provides both a clear 'what' (review/inspect immutable-pattern-related code and browser behavior) and an explicit 'Use when…' trigger, but the 'when' could be more specific with concrete trigger phrases, matching the 4-anchor rather than the fully explicit 5-anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant domain keywords (scripts, client components, bundles, runtime behavior) but omits the natural user phrasings around immutability, state mutation, or named state libraries, fitting the 3-anchor 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The immutable-data-pattern niche is mostly distinct, though the broad 'reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior' framing creates minor overlap risk with sibling frontend review skills, placing it at 4 rather than 5.	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/immutable-patterns/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.