CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

td-headers-attr

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

58

Quality

67%

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/td-headers-attr/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%

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-organized, brief overview that correctly offloads detail to a single clearly-signaled reference file, giving strong progressive disclosure. It is weakened by redundancy between sections, a lack of executable examples in the body, and implicit rather than explicit validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 'Check' and 'Fix' sections or fold them into Quick Reference to remove near-duplication and tighten token use.

Add a short inline runnable snippet (a minimal headers/scope table) or a one-line verification command so the body is actionable without requiring the reference.

Make the review workflow explicit with checkpoints (e.g., 'Check the markup -> verify with axe/the accessibility tree -> fix the headers attribute -> re-verify') rather than implying verification.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean, but the 'Check' and 'Fix' sections near-restate the Quick Reference bullets and the opening conceptual sentence could be trimmed, matching the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

Quick Reference gives concrete attribute-level guidance ('references valid id values of <th> elements', 'Separate multiple header IDs with spaces'), but the body has no executable code and the verification 'how' is abstract and deferred to the reference file.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A Check/Fix/Code Review sequence is present, but validation checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit (verification is only loosely mentioned as 'note how to verify the fix'), matching the 'sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit' anchor.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview that clearly signals a single one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md'), which exists as a real bundle file, matching the anchor for clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

77%

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-formed with an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and several concrete review actions, giving it strong completeness and specificity. It is held back by generic, boilerplate trigger phrasing that risks overlap with similar accessibility skills and by missing common keyword variations.

Suggestions

Tighten the trigger to table-specific natural phrasing (e.g., 'Use when reviewing complex data tables, or when the user mentions table headers, scope, or screen-reader table announcements') to reduce overlap with sibling accessibility skills.

Add common keyword variations users would actually say, such as 'table accessibility', 'scope vs headers', or 'screen reader table navigation'.

Lead with the rule's distinct purpose before the generic component/design-system framing so the niche is immediately clear.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions rather than just naming a domain.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, screen-reader output) and when via an explicit 'Use when...' clause, matching the highest anchor.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant keywords ('rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns', 'Link table cells to headers using IDs') but lacks common natural variations a user might say, so it matches the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The specific tie to 'Link table cells to headers using IDs' gives a niche, but the shared boilerplate opening ('reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns') overlaps with sibling accessibility skills, so it could still trigger the wrong skill.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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.