code-simplicity-reviewer

Final review pass to ensure code is as simple and minimal as possible. Use after implementation is complete to identify YAGNI violations and simplification opportunities.

Quality

66%

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 ./.agents/skills/code-simplicity-reviewer/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%

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 well-structured, actionable reviewer prompt with a concrete output template, but it lacks a verification checkpoint for destructive suggestions and could trim motivational fluff and split content for better progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Add a validation step to the review process (e.g., 'Confirm each proposed removal preserves required functionality; flag any change that risks behavior') to satisfy the destructive-operation feedback-loop requirement.

Trim the closing motivational paragraph and the example dialogue commentary to improve token efficiency.

Move the illustrative examples and output-format template into a referenced file (e.g., examples.md) to bring the core SKILL.md under the simple-skill threshold and improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Largely directive rather than concept-explaining, but the closing motivational paragraph ('Perfect is the enemy of good...') and the example dialogue preambles add tokens that could be trimmed.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete review categories with specific sub-bullets and a complete, copy-paste-ready output-format template; for an instruction-only skill this is specific actionable guidance.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 'Your review process' gives a clear 5-step sequence, but there is no validation checkpoint to verify functionality is preserved after suggested removals — a gap for a skill whose output drives destructive code changes.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	A single self-contained ~95-line file with clear section headers, but over the 50-line simple-skill threshold with no reference split or progressive disclosure structure.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

67%

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 clearly states what the skill does and when to use it with an explicit trigger, but its action list and trigger-term coverage are somewhat narrow and it could overlap with general code-review skills.

Suggestions

Expand the action list with concrete verbs (e.g., 'remove dead code, inline single-use helpers, flatten nested conditionals') to lift specificity to a score-3 anchor.

Add common natural trigger terms users say ('too complex', 'over-engineered', 'refactor for simplicity') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Sharpen distinctiveness by contrasting with general code review, e.g. 'unlike general code review, focuses solely on removing unnecessary complexity and YAGNI violations'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('code is as simple and minimal as possible') and two actions ('identify YAGNI violations and simplification opportunities'), but does not list the multiple specific concrete actions of a score-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers what ('review pass to ensure code is as simple and minimal as possible') and when ('Use after implementation is complete') with an explicit use-trigger clause.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes genuine natural terms ('YAGNI', 'simplification', 'simple', 'minimal') but misses common variations like 'too complex', 'refactor', or 'clean up code'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'YAGNI violations' and 'simplification' are a distinct niche, but the framing could still overlap with broader code-review or cleanup skills.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

81%

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 — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
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
Path: .agents/skills/code-simplicity-reviewer/SKILL.md
Commit: 45116fd

Reviewed: about 14 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.