CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

framework-docs-researcher

Gathers comprehensive documentation and best practices for frameworks, libraries, or dependencies. Use when you need official docs, version-specific constraints, or implementation patterns.

56

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/framework-docs-researcher/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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.

A well-structured agent prompt with a clear workflow, a mandatory deprecation gate, and a defined output format. Its weaknesses are description-level steps lacking executable commands, motivational/role padding, and hard-coded dates ("current year is 2026", "deprecated March 2025") that will age poorly.

Suggestions

Make the research steps executable: give concrete commands or search syntax for the GitHub research and source-exploration steps (e.g., `gh search code`, glob patterns for gem dirs) instead of 'Search GitHub for real-world usage examples'.

Remove the role framing and closing motivational line ('You are the bridge between...') — they add tokens without adding instruction — and move the 2026/2025 date references into a clearly labeled deprecation-example section or drop the hard-coded year in favor of 'the current date'.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint before synthesis, e.g., 'Confirm the documented API exists in the installed version (Gemfile.lock / package.json) before recommending it; if mismatched, re-check for the matching version's docs.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly instruction rather than explanation of known concepts, but it carries noticeable padding: the role-prose framing ("You are a meticulous... Your expertise lies in..."), the closing motivational line ("Remember: You are the bridge between complex documentation and practical implementation"), and time-sensitive details ("The current year is 2026", "Google Photos Library API scopes were deprecated March 2025") that are not in a deprecation/old-patterns section. This places it at anchor 3 — mostly efficient but with content that could be tightened — rather than anchor 4, and clearly above anchor 2's several unnecessary explanations.

3 / 5

Actionability

There is some genuinely concrete guidance — the literal search templates ("[API/service name] deprecated [current year] sunset shutdown"), the `bundle show <gem_name>` command, the Context7-first-then-web-search fallback, and the enumerated 7-part output format. But most steps stop at description level ("Search GitHub for real-world usage examples", "Extract relevant API references, guides, and examples") with no executable commands or search syntax for them, matching anchor 3's 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' rather than anchor 4's mostly-executable guidance.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The five-step Workflow Process (Initial Assessment → Deprecation Check → Documentation Collection → Source Exploration → Synthesis) is clearly sequenced, with a MANDATORY gate ("Report findings before proceeding — do not recommend deprecated APIs") and a fallback path if Context7 is unavailable. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no validation/feedback loop on the final output (e.g., verifying version compatibility claims against Gemfile.lock before reporting) — 'Always verify version compatibility' appears only as an exhortation in Quality Standards, not as a checkpoint in the workflow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body has no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist), yet it is a ~100-line single-file agent prompt whose sections (Responsibilities, Workflow, Quality Standards, Output Format, Tool Selection) are well organized and appropriately placed inline — nothing clearly belongs in a separate file. It stays at anchor 4 rather than 5 mainly because the <examples> block and the output-format spec are self-contained chunks that could be split out if the skill grows, and there is no navigational structure beyond bolded headers.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

A solid, third-person description that covers what the skill does and when to use it with reasonable trigger terms. Its main weaknesses are generic action verbs ("gathers", "collects") and a "when" clause that echoes the "what" rather than describing concrete user situations.

Suggestions

Replace generic verbs with concrete actions, e.g. "Fetches official docs via Context7, checks version-specific constraints and deprecations, and explores gem source code."

Rewrite the "Use when" clause around user situations: "Use when implementing or troubleshooting a feature with a framework, library, or dependency, or when the user asks for official docs or version compatibility."

Add natural synonyms users would say, such as "API reference", "migration guide", "deprecated", or package ecosystems ("gem", "npm package").

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("frameworks, libraries, or dependencies") and a couple of actions ("Gathers comprehensive documentation and best practices"), but the actions are generic — gathering and collecting — rather than multiple concrete operations; the remaining nouns ("version-specific constraints, or implementation patterns") are objects, not actions. It sits above anchor 2 (which would name only the domain) but below anchor 4, which requires several distinct specific actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

It answers both "what" (gathers documentation and best practices) and "when" ("Use when you need official docs, version-specific constraints, or implementation patterns"), so it clears anchor 4's floor. It does not reach anchor 5 because the "when" clause partially restates the "what" ("need official docs" ≈ what the skill gathers) instead of naming user-side situations such as "when implementing a feature with a library" or "when troubleshooting a gem".

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage: "frameworks", "libraries", "dependencies", "official docs", "documentation", "version-specific constraints", "implementation patterns" are all phrases users naturally say. It falls short of anchor 5 because common variations like "API reference", "migration", "deprecations", or specific package ecosystems (gems, npm packages) are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The documentation-research niche for "frameworks, libraries, or dependencies" is fairly distinct and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. Minor overlap risk remains with general web-research or code-search skills, and the domain terms are broad enough ("dependencies") to brush against them, keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation — 13 / 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.