components

React component architecture for creating composable, accessible components with data attributes. Use when creating/updating composable components, not for higher-level feature/page components.

Quality

51%

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/components/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

27%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body contains substantial genuinely useful, executable React code, but it is dragged down by severe verbosity (concepts Claude already knows) and a monolithic structure with broken references to a non-existent react.mdc. It reads as an inline reference dump rather than a lean skill overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep supporting files.

Suggestions

Split the monolith: turn SKILL.md into a concise overview and move each topic (Accessibility, Composition, Polymorphism, State, Types, etc.) into its own reference file under references/, then link to them one level deep.

Create the referenced react.mdc (or fix the links) so the 'see the ... section in react.mdc' pointers in the Data Attributes and Design Tokens sections resolve to a real file instead of dangling.

Cut conceptual padding Claude already knows — the Definitions glossary, the philosophical Overview, and the 'what accessibility/composition is' intros — keeping the concrete code, patterns, pitfalls, and best practices.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~1300-line body is padded with conceptual prose Claude already knows — a full Definitions glossary (primitive/component/pattern/block/page/template), a philosophical Overview, and intros explaining what accessibility and composition are — making it verbose rather than lean despite the useful code it contains.	1 / 3
Actionability	Several sections are copy-paste ready (the Composition accordion walkthrough, State stepper with useControllableState, Types and Polymorphism examples), but actionability is inconsistent: the Design Tokens and Overview sections are purely descriptive, and some examples are explicitly labeled 'simplified'.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The Composition section gives a clear numbered sequence (Root, Item, Trigger, Content, Putting it all together), but the document overall is a collection of topical reference pages rather than a sequenced workflow, and there are no validation checkpoints (none are required here, but the rubric rewards explicit sequencing throughout).	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a monolithic wall of text cramming 11 separate topics into one SKILL.md instead of an overview pointing to detailed files, and it references 'react.mdc' (e.g. 'see the Data Attribute Styling Patterns section in react.mdc') which does not exist in the bundle — a dangling reference with poor organization.	1 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Description

75%

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 well-formed: it states a clear what, includes an explicit 'Use when' trigger with both positive and negative scope, and carves out a distinct niche. It is slightly weaker on enumerating concrete actions and on trigger-term variation, but it avoids vague fluff and uses third-person voice.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain ('React component architecture') and a few concrete concerns ('composable, accessible components with data attributes') plus the actions 'creating/updating', but it does not enumerate multiple distinct concrete capabilities the way the anchor-3 example does (extract/fill/merge).	2 / 3
Completeness	It clearly states what ('React component architecture for creating composable, accessible components with data attributes') and gives an explicit 'Use when creating/updating composable components, not for higher-level feature/page components' trigger, satisfying both what and when.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords like 'composable components', 'accessible components', 'data attributes', and 'feature/page components' are present and reasonably natural for the audience, but coverage of common user variations is thin and the terms are somewhat specialized rather than richly varied.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The explicit negative boundary ('not for higher-level feature/page components') plus a focused niche (composable component architecture with data attributes) makes it clearly distinguishable and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

75%

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 — 12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (1311 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 3 suspicious	Warning

	Total	12 / 16 Passed

Repository: udecode/plate
Path: .agents/skills/components/SKILL.md
Commit: 45116fd

Reviewed: about 13 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.