CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

translation-strings

Use when reviewing a codebase for internationalisation readiness, setting up an i18n library, or preparing strings for a new locale.

60

Quality

71%

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/translation-strings/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.

A well-structured, lean overview that delegates implementation detail to a clearly signaled one-level-deep reference. Its weaknesses are the lack of executable code and explicit validation checkpoints in the body itself, plus a slightly conceptual intro paragraph.

Suggestions

Move or tighten the introductory word-order explanation so the body leads with actionable rules rather than a concept Claude already knows.

Add one minimal executable code snippet in the body (e.g. a named-placeholder t() call) so guidance is concrete before deferring to references/rule.md.

Surface at least one verification checkpoint in the body (e.g. grep for t('key') + concatenation) rather than leaving all validation steps in the reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean with single-sentence sections and tight Quick Reference bullets, but the intro paragraph explains word-order variation across languages — a concept Claude already knows — and could be trimmed; not a 1 because most of the body is efficient, not a 3 because of the conceptual preamble.

2 / 3

Actionability

Names concrete techniques ("named placeholders", "ICU MessageFormat", "pluralisation handled via the library") but provides no executable code in the body — all examples are deferred to references/rule.md; not a 1 because the guidance is specific, not a 3 because nothing in the body is copy-paste ready.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sections (Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review) imply a review→fix→explain sequence but lack explicit ordering or validation checkpoints, and the verification steps live only in the reference file; not a 1 because structure is present, not a 3 because checkpoints are implicit and validation is externalized.

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) for full implementation details; not a 2 because navigation is explicit and content is appropriately split.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

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 strong, concise description with an explicit "Use when" trigger and three concrete actions scoped to a distinct i18n niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage, which misses common phrasings like "translations" and "localization/l10n".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists three concrete actions — "reviewing a codebase for internationalisation readiness", "setting up an i18n library", and "preparing strings for a new locale" — matching the multiple-specific-actions anchor; not a 2 because it names several distinct concrete activities rather than a single domain.

3 / 3

Completeness

Answers both what (reviewing/setting up/preparing strings) and when via an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause; not a 2 because the when is explicit rather than implied.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant natural terms ("i18n library", "new locale", "strings") but omits common variations a user would say such as "translations", "translate", or "localization/l10n"; not a 3 due to those gaps, not a 1 because several usable keywords are present.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear i18n/translation niche with triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; not a 2 because the scope is narrowly scoped to internationalisation work rather than overlapping broad categories.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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.