CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

paste-inputs

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Allow pasting into form inputs. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

69

Quality

85%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

A tight, well-organized body that delegates detail to a real one-level reference and gives an unambiguous single-task workflow; the main gap is actionability, where the Check and Explain sections stay abstract and the body carries no executable code.

Suggestions

Make the Check section actionable: specify what to grep/inspect for (e.g. `onpaste`, `addEventListener('paste'` with `preventDefault`) instead of "check the codebase".

Add a short executable snippet to the body (e.g. a grep command or JS selector to find paste-blocking handlers) so the guidance is copy-paste ready, not just in the reference.

Tighten the Explain section into a concrete prompt or output shape rather than the abstract instruction to "explain how allowing pasting... improves security and accessibility".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean - short Quick Reference bullets plus brief Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections - and assumes Claude's competence without restating basic concepts; the one-line justification is on-point rather than padded.

3 / 3

Actionability

The Fix section is concrete ("Remove `onpaste=\"return false\"`") but the Check section ("Check the codebase for any JavaScript or HTML attributes that prevent users from pasting") and Explain section are direction rather than instruction, and no executable code lives in the body itself, leaving guidance incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

As a simple single-purpose skill the Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence is clear and the core action (remove paste-blocking code) is unambiguous, with a dedicated Code Review section that calls for verifying the fix; the simple-skill exception applies.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview organized into clear sections and signals a single one-level-deep reference ("see `references/rule.md`") whose file exists, matching the anchor for well-signaled, appropriately split navigation.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, specific description with an explicit Use-when trigger and concrete review actions; its main weakness is trigger-term phrasing that favors reviewer jargon over the everyday language users would actually say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions - "Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output" - matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions, not the partial level 2.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Check native semantics... inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output") and when ("Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Allow pasting into form inputs").

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords ("paste", "form inputs", "rendered HTML") but leans on reviewer/design-system jargon rather than the natural terms a user would say (e.g. "can't paste", "paste blocked", "password field"), so coverage of common variations is incomplete.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear niche - paste-event accessibility review on form inputs - with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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.