quality

Use when evaluating content pages for SEO quality. Applies to blog posts, product descriptions, landing pages, or any page expected to receive organic search traffic.

Quality

70%

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/quality/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 content is a well-structured SEO content-quality overview with a clearly signaled one-level-deep reference and reasonably actionable checklists. Its main weaknesses are redundant concept explanation and a lack of explicit validation checkpoints in the body itself.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the 'Explain' section's restatement of E-E-A-T and Google's Helpful Content system — Claude already knows these — and link to the reference for background instead.

Add an explicit verification step in the body (e.g., 'After rewriting, re-run the Code Review checklist and confirm each signal passes before marking the page fixed') to give the workflow a validation checkpoint.

De-duplicate the E-E-A-T material so the inline body only summarizes and the reference holds the full framework table, tightening progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient, but the 'Explain' section re-states what E-E-A-T stands for and the intro re-explains Google's Helpful Content system — concepts Claude already knows — which is unnecessary padding; it does not reach the 'lean, every token earns its place' anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	For an instruction-only skill the guidance is mostly actionable: 'Check' gives diagnostic questions, 'Fix' lists five concrete rewrite actions, and 'Code Review' lists six specific audit signals, with only minor gaps in how to actually measure each signal.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough Check→Fix→Code Review sequence is present, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops in the body — verification lives only in the reference file — so it sits at the 'sequence present but checkpoints implicit' anchor.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-organized into clear sections and points one level deep to references/rule.md with a clearly signaled pointer, but E-E-A-T material is duplicated between the inline 'Explain' section and the reference's E-E-A-T table, a minor organization gap.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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 cleanly states a specific SEO niche with an explicit 'Use when' trigger and concrete page-type examples, scoring well on completeness and trigger quality. It is slightly held back by naming only one action and minor overlap risk with sibling SEO skills.

Suggestions

List 2-3 concrete evaluation actions (e.g., 'audit word count and thin-content signals, check E-E-A-T, identify intent gaps') to lift specificity from a single action to comprehensive coverage.

Add a common synonym trigger such as 'SEO audit' or 'content review' to broaden natural keyword coverage.

Clarify the boundary versus adjacent SEO skills (e.g., 'content quality and helpfulness, not meta tags or structured data') to reduce overlap risk.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the SEO-quality domain and one concrete action ('evaluating content pages for SEO quality') but does not enumerate several specific actions (e.g., audit word count, check E-E-A-T, flag thin content), so it stops at the 1-2 actions anchor rather than the 'several specific actions' anchor above.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (evaluating content pages for SEO quality) and 'when' via a concrete 'Use when' clause plus enumerated page-type triggers, matching the anchor for clear and explicit what-and-when with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say — 'SEO quality', 'blog posts', 'product descriptions', 'landing pages', 'organic search traffic' — giving good coverage, though a few common synonyms (e.g., 'SEO audit', 'content review') are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The SEO content-quality niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, but there is minor overlap risk with adjacent SEO skills (e.g., meta-tag or structured-data skills), keeping it just below the minimal-conflict anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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/quality/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 15 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.