CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

review

Use when applies to product pages, local business pages, recipes, apps, books, and any page that aggregates user reviews. Use when auditing rich result eligibility for e-commerce or review sites.

55

Quality

63%

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/review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 a well-structured, lean audit-and-fix guide: concrete property names, a named external validation tool, and clean delegation of code examples to a single verified reference file. Its only weaknesses are minor — some motivational/rationale padding and the absence of an explicit re-validate-after-fix step.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean — the Check and Fix sections give direct instructions with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Two minor spots could be trimmed: the "35%" CTR motivational stat in the intro and the "Explain" section, which mostly restates eligibility/guideline content. This matches anchor 4 ('Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed') rather than 5, where every token would earn its place.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: inspect for JSON-LD blocks containing "@type": "Review" or "AggregateRating", verify exact required properties (ratingValue, ratingCount/reviewCount, bestRating), "Run the URL through Google's Rich Results Test", and nest AggregateRating inside the main entity. As an instruction-only skill, the absence of code in the body is acceptable since full examples are delegated to references/rule.md; the minor gap is no explicit post-fix verification instruction, holding it at anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear Check → Fix → verify sequence exists with a concrete external validation checkpoint (Google's Rich Results Test) called out in both Quick Reference and Check. It is not 5 because the workflow lacks an explicit validate-after-fix feedback loop (no "re-run the test after adding markup"), and not 3 because a real, named validation checkpoint is present rather than missing or implicit. No destructive/batch cap applies.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A simple, well-organized skill with a clear overview body and implementation details correctly split into a single one-level-deep reference (references/rule.md, verified to exist), clearly signaled at the end along with what it contains ("full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance"). This matches anchor 5: clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references and easy navigation.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

47%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 functions purely as a trigger list: it says when to use the skill but never states what the skill does (add/validate Review and AggregateRating schema markup). Domain keywords are decent, but the missing capability statement plus the grammatical fragment "Use when applies to" leave it weak on both completeness and specificity.

Suggestions

Lead with a what-clause stating concrete actions, e.g. "Add and validate Review and AggregateRating JSON-LD schema markup to earn star-rating rich results", then keep the Use when clause for triggers.

Fix the grammatical fragment "Use when applies to..." — it is missing a subject (e.g. "Use when the page is a product page..." or restructure as "Applies to product pages...").

Add natural trigger terms users would actually say: "star ratings", "review schema", "schema markup", "structured data", "rich snippets".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a concrete domain ("product pages, local business pages, recipes, apps, books") but contains no capability statements whatsoever — there is no verb describing what the skill actually does, matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It is not 1 because the domain list is specific rather than abstract, and not 3 because beyond the implicit 'use' no action is named.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both sentences are pure trigger clauses ("Use when applies to...", "Use when auditing..."); the 'what' is entirely absent, matching anchor 2 ('only when is present without what'). Not 3 because the 'what' is not even weakly implied — the reader never learns the skill adds/validates Review schema markup. The opening clause is also a grammatical fragment ("Use when applies to").

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage: "product pages", "local business pages", "recipes", "user reviews", "e-commerce", "review sites". A few natural terms users would say are missing — "star ratings", "review schema", "schema markup", "structured data" — and "rich result eligibility" appears only in jargon form, matching 'Good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (review-aggregating pages, rich-result eligibility) with distinct page-type triggers; minor overlap risk with sibling structured-data/SEO skills in the same rule family, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

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.

Validation — 15 / 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.