CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

clawpatch

Operate Clawpatch for semantic feature mapping, automated review, explicit finding fixes, revalidation, reports, and state recovery.

66

Quality

81%

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

88%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 content is highly actionable with executable commands, clearly sequenced workflows that include validation and recovery for batch operations, and well-organized sections. The main weakness is length — some repeated prose rules could be tightened, and the command reference could be split into a referenced file for cleaner progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Tighten the repeated 'Do not/Never' rule sentences into a single consolidated constraints list to reduce token overhead.

Consider moving the full Command Reference and Review-controls flag tables into a referenced file (e.g., REFERENCES.md) with a concise summary inline, improving progressive disclosure.

The 'Slate V2 Operating Rules' section is project-specific; gating it behind a clear conditional trigger would keep the general skill leaner.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and operational — concrete commands and gotchas rather than concepts Claude already knows — but ~470 lines with repeated 'Do not/Never' prose rules could be trimmed in places, so it sits at efficient-with-minor-over-explanation rather than fully lean.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready commands throughout (e.g., 'clawpatch review --json', 'clawpatch fix --finding <findingId> --json') covering the common cases with specific flags and JSON output.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints and feedback loops — the recoverable forced re-review JSONL loop and the 'Verification Closeout' (typecheck, lint, test, status) plus 'revalidate' satisfy the destructive/batch validation requirement.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and all content is inline, but the body is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Review, Fix, Revalidate, Locks, etc.) making it navigable; the long command reference could arguably split into a separate file, hence 4 not 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 specific, actionable, and clearly tied to a distinct named tool, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3. Adding a 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases would raise the score.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when the user asks for Clawpatch, automated code review, finding reports, clawpatch review/fix, or revalidation').

Include literal command-form triggers users would say ('clawpatch review', 'clawpatch fix', 'clawpatch report') alongside the action nouns.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'semantic feature mapping, automated review, explicit finding fixes, revalidation, reports, and state recovery' — covering the tool's full lifecycle comprehensively, matching the score-5 anchor rather than the 'minor gaps' of 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and concrete, but the description contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance; per the rubric guideline a missing 'when' caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Pairs the named tool 'Clawpatch' with six action keywords (review, finding fixes, revalidation, reports) users would naturally invoke; a few natural command-form phrases like 'clawpatch review'/'clawpatch fix' are absent, keeping it just below 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tied to a single named tool 'Clawpatch' with a clear niche and distinct triggers, giving minimal conflict risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
udecode/plate
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.