CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

webfont-format

Use when reviewing stylesheets, component styles, and responsive behavior related to Optimize web font formats. Check the rendered layout across breakpoints and interaction states before proposing a fix.

58

Quality

67%

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/webfont-format/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 overview that correctly defers detail to a single, clearly signaled reference file. It loses points for in-body redundancy, absence of executable code, and an implicit rather than explicit validation checkpoint in its review workflow.

Suggestions

Move or duplicate at least one minimal executable @font-face CSS block into the body so guidance is copy-paste ready without opening the reference.

Add an explicit validation step (e.g., re-check the rendered layout across breakpoints after applying the fix) to close the workflow's implicit checkpoint.

Consolidate the Check/Fix/Explain sections to avoid restating the Quick Reference bullets and drop the generic Explain prose.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean, but the Check/Fix/Explain sections restate the Quick Reference bullets and the Explain section is generic prose a competent model largely knows; mostly efficient with some redundancy, so not 3, yet not 1 because it avoids padded conceptual explanation.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete directives appear ('Apply font-display: swap', 'Preload critical fonts and subset'), but the body contains no executable code or commands — all real examples live in references/rule.md; not 3 because nothing is copy-paste ready in-body, not 1 because specific actionable directives are present.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A loose Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence exists, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint confirming the fix renders correctly across breakpoints; checkpoints are implicit, matching the score-2 anchor and not the destructive-operation context that would otherwise cap at 2.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Concise overview body with a clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md'), and rule.md is a real single file with no nested pointer chains; not 2 because the reference is well-signaled and content is appropriately split.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

77%

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 covers concrete actions and an explicit 'Use when' trigger, satisfying completeness and specificity. It is weakened by technical, slightly generic framing that omits natural user terms and risks overlap with broader CSS-review skills.

Suggestions

Add natural user-facing trigger terms such as 'web fonts', 'font loading', or 'WOFF2/WOFF' so it matches how users actually phrase the need.

Tighten the niche framing so the font-format focus leads rather than appearing mid-sentence after generic stylesheet-review language, reducing overlap with general CSS skills.

Rephrase the embedded rule-title fragment 'Optimize web font formats' into a natural clause rather than a verbatim rule name.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — 'reviewing stylesheets, component styles, and responsive behavior', 'Check the rendered layout across breakpoints and interaction states', 'before proposing a fix' — matching the multi-action anchor; not 2 because it lists several specific actions rather than a domain plus partial actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (review/check/fix actions) and when via the 'Use when reviewing stylesheets...' trigger clause; not 2 because the when is explicit rather than implied.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms ('stylesheets', 'component styles', 'responsive behavior', 'breakpoints', 'interaction states') but leans technical and omits common user phrasings like 'web fonts', 'font loading', or 'WOFF2'; not 3 because of missing natural variations, not 1 because keywords are present and on-topic.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to web font formats, but the broad 'reviewing stylesheets, component styles, and responsive behavior' framing could overlap with general CSS-review skills; not 3 because the font niche reads as an afterthought, not 1 because a distinct font niche is present.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

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.