CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

local-business

Use when auditing a local business website's structured data. Applies to any business that serves customers at a physical location or specific geographic area.

57

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/local-business/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%

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-organized with excellent progressive disclosure via a clean one-level reference, but it is held back by redundancy across sections, no inline executable code example, and only an implicit validation checkpoint. Consolidating the repeated field lists and adding an explicit validate-fix-retry loop would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated required-field lists into one authoritative list to remove redundancy across Check, Fix, and Code Review.

Include a minimal inline copy-paste LocalBusiness JSON-LD block in the Fix section instead of delegating all code to the reference.

Make validation an explicit checkpoint with a feedback loop, e.g. "Validate with Google's Rich Results Test; if errors are reported, fix the schema and re-validate until it passes."

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly tight with short bullet and imperative sections, but the required-field list recurs nearly verbatim across Check, Fix, and Code Review, and the intro and Explain sections both restate why-it-matters, adding redundancy that keeps it below lean score-3.

2 / 3

Actionability

The Fix section gives a concrete, specific field list (streetAddress, addressLocality, etc.) and names a validation tool, but the body contains no inline executable/copy-paste code block — the complete JSON-LD example is delegated to the reference — so it is incomplete versus the copy-paste-ready score-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sections are clearly sequenced (Quick Reference → Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review) and validation is mentioned, but only as a passing one-liner with no explicit checkpoint or fix-and-revalidate feedback loop, matching the score-2 anchor for implicit checkpoints.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The ~30-line body is a concise overview that clearly signals a single one-level-deep reference ("see references/rule.md"), and the verified rule.md file contains the full details without further nesting, satisfying the score-3 anchor for well-signaled easy navigation.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 is well-targeted with an explicit "Use when" trigger and a clear, distinctive niche, scoring high on completeness and conflict-risk. It loses points on specificity and trigger-term quality because it states only one action and misses common terms like "schema markup" or "JSON-LD".

Suggestions

Expand specificity by listing multiple concrete actions, e.g. "audit, add, and validate LocalBusiness JSON-LD structured data".

Add common trigger variations users actually say, such as "schema markup", "JSON-LD", or "local SEO".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ("local business website's structured data") and one concrete action ("auditing"), but lists only a single action rather than multiple specific concrete actions, matching the score-2 anchor rather than 3.

2 / 3

Completeness

An explicit "Use when auditing a local business website's structured data" trigger answers when, and "auditing a local business website's structured data" states what, satisfying both halves with an explicit trigger as the score-3 anchor requires.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural, relevant terms ("local business", "structured data", "physical location", "specific geographic area"), but omits common variations a user would say such as "schema markup", "JSON-LD", or "local SEO", so it falls short of full score-3 coverage.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The narrow niche of local-business structured-data audits with location-specific triggers is clearly distinguishable and unlikely to fire for unrelated SEO or general structured-data skills, matching the score-3 anchor.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
Reviewed

Table of Contents

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.