CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

dual-axis-skill-reviewer

Review skills in any project using a dual-axis method: (1) deterministic code-based checks (structure, scripts, tests, execution safety) and (2) LLM deep review findings. Use when you need reproducible quality scoring for `skills/*/SKILL.md`, want to gate merges with a score threshold (for example 90+), or need concrete improvement items for low-scoring skills. Works across projects via --project-root.

70

Quality

85%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 actionable with copy-paste commands and clear references to real bundle files. The main weaknesses are minor: a redundant feature list at the top, an abstract Step 2, and a missing validate-JSON-before-merge checkpoint.

Suggestions

Remove or trim the opening 'The script supports' bullet list, since each item is restated in the Workflow steps below.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint in Step 3: verify the LLM review JSON conforms to references/llm_review_schema.md before running the merge command.

Make Step 2 more concrete by showing the expected prompt-file path pattern and the JSON shape the LLM must return, rather than only describing the orchestration abstractly.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient with headers, bullets, and copy-paste code blocks and does not over-explain concepts Claude already knows, but the opening 'The script supports' feature list partly recapitulates the later workflow steps — minor trimmable redundancy that keeps it just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete executable commands (uv run invocations with full flags, REVIEWER placeholder setup) that are copy-paste ready, but Step 2 ('Run LLM Review') is somewhat abstract orchestration guidance rather than a concrete runnable command, leaving a minor gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step sequence (auto-axis + prompt, LLM review, merge, optional controls) is present, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint (e.g., verify the LLM JSON conforms to the schema before merging); the operation is non-destructive so the score-3 cap does not apply, leaving a minor checkpoint gap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview that signals one-level-deep references to real bundle files — 'references/llm_review_schema.md' and 'references/scoring_rubric.md' (both present) — plus the script and tests directory, with content appropriately split rather than inlined.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 is strong: it states concrete capabilities, gives explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance with multiple natural phrases, and carves out a distinct niche. Voice is correctly third person ('Review skills', 'Works across projects'). The only minor gap is a few missing natural synonyms in the trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions — 'deterministic code-based checks (structure, scripts, tests, execution safety)', 'LLM deep review findings', 'gate merges with a score threshold', 'concrete improvement items' — giving comprehensive coverage of capabilities.

5 / 5

Completeness

Clearly and explicitly answers both 'what' (dual-axis method: deterministic checks + LLM deep review) and 'when' (concrete 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger phrases), matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases are present ('Use when you need reproducible quality scoring', 'want to gate merges with a score threshold (for example 90+)', 'need concrete improvement items for low-scoring skills') with good coverage, but a few natural synonyms a user might say are missing, so it sits above the midpoint rather than at the top anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear niche — reviewing skills/*/SKILL.md with dual-axis scoring and merge gating — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
tradermonty/claude-trading-skills
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.