CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

performance-budget

Use when reviewing CI configuration, bundle analysis workflows, or pull requests that add dependencies and assets. Distinguish bundle-size budgets from runtime budgets such as Lighthouse or Core Web Vitals so teams can enforce both.

65

Quality

78%

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/performance-budget/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.

A well-structured overview that uses progressive disclosure effectively by deferring code to references/rule.md, but the body itself trades some token efficiency for motivational explanation and lacks executable examples or explicit validation checkpoints. Tightening the intro and adding a concrete size-limit/Lighthouse CI snippet would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Trim the motivational opening paragraph and remove overlap between Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review so every token earns its place.

Add one copy-paste-ready example in the Fix section (e.g., a minimal size-limit package.json block or a Lighthouse CI assertion snippet) instead of deferring all code to the reference.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the workflow (e.g., 'After adding budgets, confirm CI fails on a deliberately oversized PR before merging').

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The Quick Reference and sectioned guidance are mostly efficient, but the motivational intro ('performance degrades gradually…now takes 5', 'far cheaper than debugging a slow production site') explains concepts Claude already knows and the Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections overlap.

2 / 3

Actionability

It names concrete tools and thresholds ('size-limit', 'Lighthouse CI assertions', 'max LCP time') but provides no executable code or commands in the body, deferring all implementation to the reference file.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A Check→Fix→Code Review sequence and a flagging checklist are present, but there are no explicit validation/feedback checkpoints and the sections read as partly redundant categorized tasks rather than a tightly sequenced workflow.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-organized overview (Quick Reference, Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review) with a clearly signaled one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md for full implementation details, and that file exists.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

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 precise, third-person description with explicit trigger guidance and concrete named metrics, cleanly answering both what the skill does and when to use it. It is distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete contexts ('reviewing CI configuration, bundle analysis workflows, or pull requests that add dependencies and assets') and a specific distinguishing action naming Lighthouse and Core Web Vitals, matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicit 'Use when…' clause answers when, and 'Distinguish bundle-size budgets from runtime budgets…so teams can enforce both' answers what, satisfying both halves with an explicit trigger.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Covers natural terms a user would say — 'CI configuration', 'bundle analysis workflows', 'pull requests', 'dependencies', 'assets', 'Lighthouse', 'Core Web Vitals' — giving good trigger coverage.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to performance budgets in CI with a distinctive 'distinguish bundle-size vs runtime budgets' framing, making it unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

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.