word-count

Use when applies to key landing pages, blog posts, product pages, and any page targeting competitive queries. Use when diagnosing poor rankings or after a Google Helpful Content update.

Quality

86%

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

Quality

Content

100%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content body is a tight, well-structured overview with concrete actionable guidance and a single genuine one-level reference. It avoids padding and presents a clear Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review workflow suited to a simple instruction-only skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~30-line body is lean and well-organized with no padding or restatement of concepts Claude already knows (no 'what is a PDF'-style explanations). Each section earns its tokens. Not a 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to trim.	3 / 3
Actionability	Concrete, executable instruction is given throughout: 'count visible body text words (excluding navigation, headers, footers)', 'Flag pages under 200 words of unique body content', 'compare depth to the top 3 ranking pages', 'Add noindex to thin utility pages'. For an instruction-only SEO skill this is specific and copy-ready. Not a 2 because the guidance is complete, not vague or pseudocode.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sequence structures the single task unambiguously. This is a non-destructive audit (not a batch/XML/db operation), so the missing-validation cap does not apply, and the simple-skill note permits a 3 for an unambiguous single action. Not a 2 because the steps are explicit and ordered.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview that points to one clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ('For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md'), and that file exists and is not itself a nested pointer chain. Not a 2 because the split is appropriate and navigation is easy.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Description

72%

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 strong trigger-term coverage and a clear niche, but is grammatically broken ('Use when applies to') and omits any statement of what the skill actually does, capping completeness. Adding a concrete action verb and a subject would lift specificity and completeness.

Suggestions

Lead with what the skill does, e.g. 'Audits key pages for thin content and recommends expansion or noindexing.' before the 'Use when' triggers.

Fix the broken grammar: 'Use when applies to key landing pages...' has no subject — write 'Use when auditing key landing pages...'.

Mirror common natural phrasings users say, such as 'thin content', 'word count', or 'content depth', to strengthen trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names target domains ('key landing pages, blog posts, product pages, and any page targeting competitive queries') but states no concrete action — it never says what the skill does, only when to use it. It is not a 1 because domains are named, but not a 3 because no actions (count, audit, expand) are listed.	2 / 3
Completeness	It answers 'when' twice ('Use when applies to...', 'Use when diagnosing...') but entirely omits 'what does this skill do', which caps completeness at 2 per the rubric's missing-trigger guidance. Not a 1 because explicit trigger guidance is present.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a user would say are well covered: 'poor rankings', 'Google Helpful Content update', 'competitive queries', 'blog posts', 'product pages'. These read like genuine user phrasing rather than technical jargon.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The SEO thin-content / word-count niche with ranking-and-update triggers is clearly distinguishable and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. Not a 2 because the triggers are specific rather than overlapping with generic content skills.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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/word-count/SKILL.md
Commit: 48405aa

Reviewed: about 6 hours 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.