table-headers

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

Quality

76%

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/table-headers/SKILL.md

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.

A concise, well-structured single-purpose accessibility rule skill that keeps the overview in SKILL.md and pushes implementation detail to a real, clearly signaled reference file. The main improvements are tightening the intro/Code Review prose and making the verification step an explicit checkpoint rather than a passing mention.

Suggestions

Replace the generic intro sentence (which restates what <th>/scope do) with the actionable rule statement to avoid explaining a concept Claude already knows.

Surface a minimal inline code snippet (a 3-line <th scope> example) so the body is self-sufficient for the common case without requiring the reference.

Promote the verification mention into an explicit 'Verify' checkpoint (e.g. 'Verify: confirm <th> and scope appear in the accessibility tree via axe/Lighthouse') to strengthen the workflow's feedback loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly lean with tight Quick Reference bullets and short Check/Fix/Explain sections; minor over-explanation in the intro sentence and the verbose Code Review paragraph could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Gives concrete directives ('Use <th> for all table headers', 'Apply scope="col" or scope="row"'); the executable code example lives in the reference file, which is acceptable for an instruction-only skill but leaves a minor gap inline.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence with verification mentioned ('note how to verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling'), though checkpoints are not framed as an explicit validate-and-retry feedback loop.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Clean overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep navigation to a real references/rule.md for code examples and framework-specific guidance; content is appropriately split.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 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, mostly third-person description that pairs an explicit 'Use when...' trigger with a concrete list of inspection actions. The main weakness is the awkward embedding of the rule title 'Define proper table headers' into the trigger clause, which slightly muddies both the trigger phrasing and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Rewrite the trigger clause so the rule name is not embedded mid-sentence, e.g. 'Use when reviewing HTML tables or design-system patterns to verify proper table headers (th, scope).'

Add natural synonyms/file cues users might say ('tables', 'data tables', 'th elements', 'scope attribute') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Tighten the 'what' to lead with the highest-signal action ('Verify <th> elements and scope attributes on data tables') before listing secondary inspection points.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete review actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), with only minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (Check/inspect actions) and 'when' ('Use when reviewing rendered HTML...'), with the 'when' clause slightly weakened by the awkwardly embedded rule title.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural-term coverage ('rendered HTML', 'table headers', 'interactive components', 'screen-reader'), though a few common synonyms/extensions are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche around table headers, but the broad 'rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns' framing creates minor overlap risk with sibling accessibility 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/table-headers/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 7 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.