CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

weak-internal-links

Use when applies to any site with more than 20 pages. Use when auditing site architecture, investigating why certain pages underperform in search, or after a site migration.

44

Quality

44%

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/weak-internal-links/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 body is a well-organized, lean overview that defers implementation detail to a single clearly signaled reference, which is good progressive disclosure. Its main gaps are a missing verification checkpoint in the workflow and unspecified crawl tooling for the core detection step.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification/checkpoint step in the body (e.g., 'After adding links, re-crawl to confirm each target page now has ≥3 dofollow inlinks') rather than deferring all validation to the reference.

Name a concrete crawl mechanism or pointer to one in the 'Check' section so 'build an internal link graph' is actionable without leaving the skill.

Trim the opening PageRank sentence and de-duplicate it against the Quick Reference to recover token budget.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely lean with useful Quick Reference bullets, but the opening PageRank explanation restates a concept Claude already knows and overlaps the Quick Reference, so it could be tightened rather than earning a 3.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete specifics are present ('3–5 topically relevant pages', '0 dofollow internal links', 'keyword-relevant anchor text', 'high-authority pages'), but 'Crawl the site and build an internal link graph' names no tool/command and the executable examples are deferred to the reference, leaving key details missing for a 3.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There is a clear Check → Fix → Code Review sequence, but the body has no explicit validation or verification checkpoint for this batch link-add operation (the reference's Verification section is deferred), capping it at 2 per the rubric's destructive/batch guidance.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A concise overview body points with a clear, well-signaled single reference ('For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md') that is one level deep and verified to exist, with detail appropriately split out.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

32%

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 trigger-heavy with two explicit 'Use when' clauses but omits the skill's actual capability, leaning entirely on context scenarios. It is in the right domain but lacks the 'internal links' terms that would make it both complete and distinctive.

Suggestions

Add a leading capability clause stating what the skill does, e.g. 'Detects and flags pages with few or no internal dofollow links (orphan and weakly-linked pages).'

Include the core trigger term 'internal links' (and variants like 'internal linking', 'orphan pages', 'PageRank') so users naturally needing this skill match it.

Tighten the distinctiveness by scoping the triggers to link-graph/LinkRank concerns rather than the broad 'auditing site architecture' framing that overlaps sibling SEO skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('site with more than 20 pages', 'site architecture') and some activities ('auditing', 'investigating why certain pages underperform', 'after a site migration'), but never states the skill's core action of detecting weak internal links, so it is not comprehensive enough for a 3.

2 / 3

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and repeated ('Use when applies to any site...', 'Use when auditing...'), but the 'what' — what the skill actually does (detect/flag/fix weak internal links) — is never stated; this is the inverse of the score-2 anchor and matches 'missing what OR when'.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like 'auditing site architecture', 'underperform in search', and 'site migration' are natural, but the most likely user term for this skill — 'internal links' / 'linking' — is entirely absent, so coverage of common variations is incomplete.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It sits in the SEO niche with a >20 pages threshold, but 'auditing site architecture' and 'underperforming pages' overlap heavily with sibling SEO skills and the distinctive 'internal links' trigger is missing, so it could still conflict.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

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.