user-file-ops
Simple operations on user-provided text files including summarization.
46
32%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./examples/skillrun/skills/user_file_ops/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
14%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is too vague to be effective for skill selection. It lacks specific concrete actions beyond 'summarization', provides no explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), and is generic enough to conflict with many other file or text processing skills. It needs substantial improvement across all dimensions.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to summarize, count words, search, or extract sections from .txt or plain text files.'
Replace 'simple operations' with specific concrete actions such as 'summarize content, search for keywords, count lines/words, extract sections, or reformat text.'
Include natural keyword variations users would say, such as 'summarize', '.txt', 'plain text', 'read file', 'word count', to improve trigger term coverage and distinctiveness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description mentions 'simple operations' and 'summarization' but 'simple operations' is extremely vague. Only one concrete action (summarization) is named, and the rest is abstract language. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is weak (vague 'simple operations' plus summarization), and there is no 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance at all. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the weak 'what' brings it down to 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'text files' and 'summarization' which are somewhat natural terms users might say, but misses common variations like 'summarize', '.txt', 'read file', 'parse text', or other specific operations users would request. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Simple operations on text files' is extremely generic and would easily conflict with many other skills that handle files, text processing, or document manipulation. There is nothing that carves out a clear niche. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides concrete, runnable commands but is undermined by repetitive examples that all demonstrate the same pattern with different filenames. The overview includes some unnecessary explanation about file staging that Claude doesn't need. The skill would benefit from showing example output and condensing the redundant examples into one with a brief note about path flexibility.
Suggestions
Condense the three nearly identical examples into one example with a brief note that the same pattern applies to any input/output path combination.
Add an example of what the output summary file actually contains (e.g., line count, word count, byte count, preview text) so the skill is fully actionable.
Remove the paragraph explaining how user-provided files are staged into the workspace—this is framework context Claude doesn't need in the skill body.
Add a brief note about error cases (e.g., file not found) or expected behavior when the input is not a text file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content includes some unnecessary explanation (e.g., explaining where user-provided files are typically exposed, how the framework stages files). The three examples are repetitive—they all show the same command pattern with different filenames, which could be condensed to one example with a note about varying paths. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The commands shown are concrete and executable, but the skill never explains what the script actually does or what the output looks like. There's no example output, and the script itself (scripts/summarize_file.sh) is referenced but its behavior (statistics, preview) is only vaguely described in the overview. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a simple single-step task (run a script with input/output paths), so the workflow is straightforward. However, there's no validation or error handling guidance—what if the file doesn't exist, or the script fails? For a simple skill this is acceptable but not exemplary. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is organized with clear sections (Overview, Examples, Output Files), which is good. However, the three nearly identical examples bloat the content unnecessarily, and there are no references to additional documentation or the script's source for deeper understanding. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- trpc-group/trpc-agent-go
- Commit
09cce3e
- 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.