web-app-manifest

Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Link a Web App Manifest for installability. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.

Quality

67%

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/web-app-manifest/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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 with a clean one-level reference split and concrete Quick Reference guidance, but it pads the intro with PWA concepts Claude already knows and leaves validation checkpoints implicit in the review workflow.

Suggestions

Trim or remove the introductory paragraph explaining what a PWA/manifest is; Claude already knows this and the 'Why It Matters' content belongs in the reference if kept.

Add an explicit verification checkpoint in the Check/Fix flow (e.g., 'After linking, confirm the manifest loads and required fields validate') to raise workflow clarity.

Surface one minimal complete manifest.json example inline in Quick Reference so the body is copy-paste ready without opening the reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean, but the opening paragraph explains what a Web App Manifest/PWA is ('Installed PWAs launch in their own window, appear in app switchers, and can receive push notifications') — concepts Claude already knows. Not a 4 because that introductory padding is noticeable rather than minor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Quick Reference gives concrete, executable guidance including the link tag ('<link rel="manifest" href="/manifest.json">') and specific field requirements (name, short_name, 192px/512px icons, start_url, display: standalone, theme_color). Not a 5 because full copy-paste examples live in the reference rather than the body.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections provide a rough sequence, but validation checkpoints are only implicit ('Check if this HTML file has a Web App Manifest linked'). Not a 4 because no explicit verify step is present in the body; not a 2 because the sequence is coherent.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a well-organized overview (under 50 lines, clear sections) with a single clearly-signaled one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md'), and that reference file exists. Easy navigation with content appropriately split between overview and detail.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 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 provides explicit trigger guidance and a specific review niche with concrete actions, scoring well on completeness and distinctiveness. Its main limitation is narrow action coverage (validate/review only) and missing common synonyms like PWA or manifest.json.

Suggestions

Broaden the 'what' beyond validation to include linking/creating the manifest (e.g., 'Link, validate, and fix Web App Manifests') to lift specificity and completeness.

Add natural synonyms users say, such as 'PWA', 'progressive web app', or 'manifest.json', to improve trigger-term coverage toward a 5.

Tighten the broad 'reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' framing to reduce overlap with generic frontend review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (Web App Manifest for installability) and two concrete actions ('reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' and 'Validate the final browser-facing markup'), but coverage is not comprehensive. Not a 4 because only two actions are listed rather than several specific ones.	3 / 5
Completeness	Has both an explicit 'Use when reviewing...' trigger and a clear 'what' ('Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction'). Not a 5 because the 'what' is narrow (validate only) and lacks the broader create/link actions.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say ('templates', 'rendered HTML', 'shared components', 'Web App Manifest', 'installability') with good coverage. Not a 5 because common synonyms like 'PWA', 'progressive web app', or 'manifest.json' are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The manifest/installability niche is mostly distinct with concrete review triggers, though the broad 'reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components' framing creates minor overlap with other frontend review skills. Not a 5 due to that overlap risk; not a 3 because the niche is clearly bounded.	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/web-app-manifest/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 4 days 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.