right-to-erasure

Use when auditing account settings pages, privacy dashboards, or API routes to verify that a complete data deletion path exists for users.

Quality

60%

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/right-to-erasure/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

46%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.

A neatly structured, single-purpose skill body that appropriately offloads detail to one real reference file. Its weaknesses are a padded regulatory intro and, more importantly, vague non-executable guidance with no validation checkpoints for a destructive deletion flow.

Suggestions

Trim the opening GDPR paragraph to a one-line rationale and drop the fine-size detail Claude already knows.

Add at least one concrete, executable snippet in the body (e.g., the actual client-side storage clearing calls and an example DELETE request) so the skill is actionable without forcing a reference read.

Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint (e.g., 'Confirm the server returned 202/204 and re-query the user endpoint to verify 404') to satisfy the destructive-operation feedback-loop requirement.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and well-sectioned, but the opening GDPR paragraph explains regulatory context and fines (e.g., 'up to €20 million or 4% of global annual turnover') that Claude already knows, which is padding the model does not need.	3 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is high-level ('Clear all client-side storage: localStorage, sessionStorage, IndexedDB, and cookies', 'Send a deletion request to the server') with no executable code, no specific commands, and no concrete request shape; it describes rather than instructs, and delegates all specifics to the reference.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough sequence is present (clear client storage -> send deletion request -> confirm -> complete within 30 days), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints for this destructive operation and no feedback loop to verify deletion actually occurred; per the rubric's destructive-operation cap, this prevents scoring above 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview organized into clear sections (Quick Reference, Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review) with a single well-signaled one-level-deep reference to references/rule.md that exists in the bundle; not a 5 only because the reference is cited once at the bottom rather than section-linked for easy navigation.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

75%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.

A solid trigger-focused description that names specific UI surfaces and a concrete verification goal, with clear 'when' guidance. It is slightly below top marks because the 'what' capability is implied rather than stated alongside the trigger, and a few natural synonyms (delete account, right to be forgotten) are absent.

Suggestions

Lead with a brief explicit capability statement (e.g., 'Verifies that a user-facing data deletion mechanism exists') before the 'Use when' clause so both what and when are explicit.

Add natural synonyms users might say, such as 'delete account', 'right to be forgotten', or 'GDPR erasure', to broaden trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names concrete actions ('auditing account settings pages, privacy dashboards, or API routes', 'verify that a complete data deletion path exists') with specific target surfaces, falling just short of score 5's comprehensive multi-action coverage because it lists essentially one composite action (auditing/verifying).	4 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear 'Use when...' trigger clause with concrete contexts, and the 'what' (verify a complete data deletion path exists) is implied by the auditing action; not a 5 because the 'what' is expressed only as the activity rather than an explicit capability statement alongside the when.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural trigger phrases users would say ('account settings pages', 'privacy dashboards', 'API routes', 'data deletion path') with good coverage, missing a few synonyms like 'right to be forgotten', 'delete account', or 'GDPR' that a user might naturally invoke.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The narrow scope of data-deletion auditing on specific surfaces (settings pages, privacy dashboards, API routes) is mostly distinct from related privacy skills, with only minor overlap risk against general privacy or GDPR consent skills.	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/right-to-erasure/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.