CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

scrolljacking

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Avoid scrolljacking and custom scroll behavior. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

62

Quality

73%

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/scrolljacking/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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 clean, well-structured overview with excellent progressive disclosure to references/rule.md. It is held back by repeated rationale phrasing across sections and Fix guidance that stays high-level rather than giving concrete remediation steps.

Suggestions

Remove the duplicated 'breaks user expectations/interferes with assistive technologies/motor or cognitive disabilities' phrasing from either the intro or the Explain section to tighten conciseness.

Make the Fix section more actionable by adding a concrete pointer or short snippet (e.g., remove preventDefault on wheel/touchmove, prefer CSS scroll-snap, gate effects behind prefers-reduced-motion) rather than only 'Remove JavaScript that overrides default scroll behavior'.

Add an explicit verification checkpoint in the Check section (e.g., 'Confirm scroll feels native via keyboard Page Up/Down and a screen reader; see references/rule.md#verification') to lift workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient but repeats the 'breaks user expectations, interferes with assistive technologies... motor impairments or cognitive disabilities' idea across the intro, a Quick Reference bullet, and the Explain section, which is unnecessary duplication that could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

The Check section lists specific things to verify (scroll speed, direction, hijacked events), but the Fix section gives only high-level direction ('Remove JavaScript that overrides default scroll behavior') with no concrete code or commands in the body itself.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sections give a clear, logical review sequence that is well-organized for a single-purpose review skill, though explicit verification checkpoints are only implicit rather than called out.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview that delegates full implementation details, code examples, and framework guidance to a clearly signaled, one-level-deep references/rule.md, which exists as a real file.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 is well-constructed with an explicit 'Use when' trigger, concrete inspection actions, and natural accessibility vocabulary. Its main weakness is a broad opening clause that slightly blurs distinctiveness against general a11y review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete inspection actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output') with only minor coverage gaps, fitting the 'several specific actions' anchor rather than the comprehensive 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'when' ('Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to...scrolljacking') and 'what' (the concrete check/inspect actions), matching the anchor requiring both with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms users would say ('rendered HTML, interactive components, design-system patterns', 'scrolljacking and custom scroll behavior', 'keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, screen-reader output') with good but not exhaustive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The scrolljacking/custom-scroll niche is distinct, but the broad opening 'reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns' creates minor overlap risk with general accessibility review skills, keeping it just below 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

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.