write-ok

Write a deterministic OK file to out/ok.txt.

Quality

71%

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 ./examples/evaluation/skill/skills/write-ok/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

96%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 a model of token efficiency and actionability: one overview sentence, a single copy-paste-ready command, and the expected output, backed by a real, working script. The only weakness is structural — section labels are plain text rather than markdown headings, which hurts navigation and rendering. Fixing the header formatting would bring the content to full marks.

Suggestions

Convert the plain-text section labels ("Overview", "Command", "Output Files") to markdown headers ("## Overview", etc.) so sections render and navigate correctly.

State explicitly that out/ok.txt will contain the literal text "OK" and that running the script is idempotent, so downstream validation steps know exactly what to assert.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The 11-line body is lean and efficient — an overview sentence, one executable command, and an output file list — with no over-explanation and every token earning its place (anchor 5). Not a 4 because there is nothing that could be trimmed.	5 / 5
Actionability	"bash scripts/write_ok.sh" is copy-paste ready, the referenced script exists and is complete (creates out/, writes the file, echoes confirmation), and the expected output file is explicitly listed — fully executable guidance (anchor 5). Not a 4 because there are no gaps in the common case.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	This is a simple single-task skill with one unambiguous action (run the script from the skill root), and the script itself handles directory creation and output confirmation; the simple-skill exception applies, so workflow clarity scores 5. The operation is non-destructive, so the validation cap does not apply.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no external references needed; the one referenced path (scripts/write_ok.sh) is a real, one-level-deep file. However, the section titles ("Overview", "Command", "Output Files") are plain text lines without markdown "#" headers, a minor organization gap that weakens navigation — anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

46%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 concrete and unambiguous about what the skill does, but it omits any trigger guidance, so a user or Claude has no signal for when to invoke it. It is lean and free of fluff, yet its keyword coverage is too narrow to reliably surface the skill. Adding an explicit "Use when..." clause with natural trigger terms would fix both weaknesses at once.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when a downstream step or test harness needs to verify that a skill ran successfully."

Include natural user-facing terms and synonyms such as "marker file", "sentinel file", "smoke test", or "validation check" so the skill surfaces when users describe the need in their own words.

Briefly state what the file contents are (the literal text "OK") and that the output path is fixed, to round out the capability description without adding fluff.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names one concrete, precise action ("Write a deterministic OK file to out/ok.txt") including the exact output path, but lists only a single capability, matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions that is not comprehensive. It is not a 4 because there are not several specific actions, and not a 2 because the action stated is concrete rather than generic.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear ("Write a deterministic OK file to out/ok.txt") but the "when" is entirely absent, which matches anchor 3 and is also explicitly capped at 3 by the judging guideline for a missing "Use when..." clause. Not a 4 because no trigger guidance exists even weakly.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The only keywords are technical ("deterministic", "out/ok.txt"); there are no natural phrases a user would say when needing this skill (e.g., "marker file", "health check", "validate the run"). This sits at anchor 2 — a couple of keywords but missing the natural phrases users say — rather than 1, because the terms are relevant and specific rather than entirely generic.	2 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Deterministic OK file to out/ok.txt" carves out a fairly distinct niche (sentinel/marker file creation for pipeline validation) with only minor overlap risk against generic file-writing skills — anchor 4. Not 5 because the niche is not reinforced with distinct trigger phrases, and not 3 because the target file and deterministic wording make it clearly distinguishable.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: trpc-group/trpc-agent-go
Path: examples/evaluation/skill/skills/write-ok/SKILL.md
Commit: 9bb1c42

Reviewed: 5 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.