visual-regression

Use when reviewing CI coverage, automated checks, or test strategy related to Use visual regression testing. Focus on whether the rule is continuously verified, not just documented.

Quality

58%

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/visual-regression/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

46%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 well-structured and appropriately defers implementation detail to a single real reference file, but it spends tokens on a concept primer Claude already knows and provides little executable guidance of its own. Strengthening the Fix section and tightening the intro would raise quality most.

Suggestions

Add one concrete, executable element to the Fix section (e.g., a minimal Playwright toHaveScreenshot snippet or the `npx playwright test --update-snapshots` baseline command) instead of only naming tools.

Delete or compress the opening concept-explanation paragraph, which duplicates the 'Why It Matters' section already in references/rule.md.

Make the review sequence explicit (e.g., numbered Check -> Flag gaps -> Fix -> Verify in CI) so the workflow checkpoints are stated rather than implied.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The intro paragraph ('Functional tests verify behavior but don't see your page. A CSS refactor might pass all unit and integration tests...') explains a concept Claude already knows and duplicates the 'Why It Matters' section in references/rule.md; the rest is mostly efficient.	3 / 5
Actionability	The Fix section offers only high-level hints ('using Playwright's screenshot comparison or a tool like Chromatic') with no code, commands, or configuration in the body; all executable detail is deferred to the reference file.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections give a loose review sequence, but no ordered steps or verification checkpoints are stated; the sequence is present yet implicit.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md (verified to exist and hold the code examples and framework guidance). Minor gaps: the body inlines content duplicated in the reference, and the pointer is one generic sentence rather than per-topic navigation.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 has an explicit and natural trigger clause with relevant domain keywords, but the capability side is under-specified and contains the awkward embedded rule title 'Use visual regression testing'. Overall a solid, mostly distinct description with minor polish needed.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('CI coverage, automated checks, or test strategy related to Use visual regression testing') and 1-2 actions ('reviewing', 'Focus on whether the rule is continuously verified'), but the what-side remains generic with no concrete capability verbs like flag, report, or fix.	3 / 5
Completeness	Has both an explicit 'Use when reviewing...' trigger and a what ('reviewing CI coverage, automated checks, or test strategy', 'Focus on whether the rule is continuously verified'), but the what is a scope description rather than a crisp, concrete capability statement.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural phrases users would say ('visual regression testing', 'CI coverage', 'automated checks', 'test strategy') are present, but common synonyms like 'screenshot testing', 'visual diffs', or 'snapshot tests' are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (visual regression testing verification in CI) with distinct triggers, but it could overlap with sibling CI/testing review skills in the same checklist family.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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/visual-regression/SKILL.md
Commit: 7bfd868

Reviewed: 1 day 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.