terms-of-service

Use when reviewing whether a website or web application has a visible Terms of Service link accessible from every page.

Quality

72%

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/terms-of-service/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

70%

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-organized overview that uses progressive disclosure effectively and gives a clear single-task workflow, but it carries some redundant legal-context explanation and lacks inline executable code or examples.

Suggestions

Tighten or remove the opening paragraph that re-explains what Terms of Service protect, since Claude already knows this and the same point appears in the reference.

Inline at least one minimal executable snippet (e.g., a footer-link selector or registration-checkbox check) so the body is actionable without requiring the reference for the common case.

Make the Code Review section more concrete by naming the specific responses/behaviors to verify (e.g., 'confirm the /terms link returns 200 and is present in the footer HTML of an interior page') rather than generic 'server config, headers, forms'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean and offloads detail to the reference, but the opening paragraph re-explains what Terms of Service protect ('limiting liability, establishing jurisdiction …') and there is minor overlap with the Quick Reference bullets.	2 / 3
Actionability	The Check and Fix sections give concrete, specific guidance ('footer contains a link … on all pages', 'explicit acceptance checkbox during registration'), but the body has no executable code or copy-paste examples and the Code Review section is comparatively generic ('Review server config, headers, forms …').	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	This is a simple single-task review skill whose action is unambiguous (verify footer ToS link on all pages plus registration acceptance), so per the simple-skills note the clear Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review framing earns full marks.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md ('see references/rule.md'), and that referenced file exists, giving clean navigation with no nested references.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

75%

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-structured with an explicit 'Use when' trigger and a clear, distinctive niche, but it describes only a single action and omits common keyword variations a user might naturally say.

Suggestions

Add common trigger-term variations such as 'ToS', 'terms and conditions', and 'footer legal link' so the description matches more natural user phrasing.

Name the concrete review actions explicitly (e.g., 'check the footer link on every page and the registration acceptance checkbox') to lift specificity beyond a single action.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain (Terms of Service link, website/web application) and one concrete action ("reviewing whether … has a visible Terms of Service link"), but does not list multiple distinct actions, so it stops at 'names domain and some actions, not comprehensive.'	2 / 3
Completeness	The explicit "Use when reviewing whether …" clause provides the trigger, and the same phrase states what the skill does (review ToS link visibility on every page), clearly answering both what and when.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like "Terms of Service", "website", and "web application" appear, but common variations users would also say ("ToS", "terms and conditions", "footer", "legal link") are missing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The trigger is narrowly scoped to Terms of Service link visibility/review, a distinct niche that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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/terms-of-service/SKILL.md
Commit: 48405aa

Reviewed: about 7 hours 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.