memory-leaks

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

Quality

56%

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/memory-leaks/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

53%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 with a useful Quick Reference and a clean one-level pointer to references/rule.md, but it carries an unnecessary concept-explanation paragraph (duplicated in the reference), no executable code, and presents parallel prompt-style modes rather than a sequenced, validated workflow.

Suggestions

Remove or trim the opening 'Memory leaks cause applications to consume increasing amounts of memory...' paragraph, which explains a concept Claude already knows and duplicates content in references/rule.md.

Add at least one minimal inline code snippet (e.g. AbortController cleanup) so the body is actionable without forcing a jump to the reference.

Collapse the redundant Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections into a single clearly sequenced review-then-fix-then-verify workflow with an explicit browser verification checkpoint.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean, but the opening paragraph explaining what memory leaks are ('Memory leaks cause applications to consume increasing amounts of memory over time...') is concept knowledge Claude already has and is duplicated in references/rule.md, and the Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections restate overlapping directives.	3 / 5
Actionability	The Quick Reference names specific, actionable patterns (remove event listeners, clear setInterval/setTimeout, use WeakMap/WeakSet, use AbortController), but the body contains no executable code — all examples live in references/rule.md — and the Check/Fix/Explain sections are high-level directives ('Analyze this code...', 'Fix the memory leaks...') rather than concrete steps.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The content is organized into labeled sections (Quick Reference, Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review) but these are parallel modes of use rather than a sequenced workflow, and there are no explicit validation checkpoints even though the Fix path modifies code.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a clear overview that delegates full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance to a single one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md'), which exists; minor gaps are the duplicated 'Why It Matters' paragraph and the pointer appearing only at the very end.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 includes an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and names specific review targets, but it is grammatically broken where the rule title 'Prevent common memory leak patterns' is embedded mid-sentence, which muddies both the 'what' and the natural trigger phrasing.

Suggestions

Rewrite the description so the rule title is not pasted mid-sentence, e.g. 'Review scripts, client components, bundles, and runtime behavior for common JavaScript memory leak patterns...'

Lead with the natural trigger phrase 'memory leaks' so users who say 'check my code for memory leaks' land on this skill.

Tighten the distinctiveness by foregrounding the memory-leak niche rather than the generic 'reviewing scripts and components' framing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain and a couple of concrete actions ('reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior', 'Inspect both source code and the browser execution path'), but the actions are generic review/inspect verbs and the embedded rule title 'Prevent common memory leak patterns' breaks the sentence, leaving coverage non-comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (reviewing frontend code for memory leak patterns, inspecting source and browser path) and 'when' ('Use when reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior...') are present and explicit, though the 'what' is muddied by the broken grammar around the rule title.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant terms appear ('scripts', 'client components', 'bundles', 'runtime behavior', 'browser execution path') but the natural standalone phrase 'memory leak' is only awkwardly embedded in 'related to Prevent common memory leak patterns', and common synonyms/variations a user would actually say are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The memory-leak focus gives it a niche, but the broad leading framing 'reviewing scripts, client components, bundles, or runtime behavior' could plausibly fire for general frontend code-review or performance-review skills, creating overlap risk.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 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/memory-leaks/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.