pattern-recognition-specialist

Analyzes code for design patterns, anti-patterns, naming conventions, and duplication. Use when checking codebase consistency or verifying new code follows established patterns.

Quality

63%

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/pattern-recognition-specialist/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

The content is a well-organized agent prompt with a clear six-step workflow and named tools, but it is padded with persona fluff, lacks executable examples, and has no validation checkpoints or external reference structure. These keep it at the mid-level anchor across all four dimensions.

Suggestions

Remove or tighten the persona preamble ('expertise spans multiple programming languages with deep knowledge...') so every line earns its place for token efficiency.

Add at least one concrete, executable command example (e.g., a sample Grep/ast-grep/jscpd invocation with flags and expected output) to move from described guidance to copy-paste-ready actionability.

Introduce an explicit validation/checkpoint step in the workflow (e.g., confirm findings against project conventions in AGENTS.md before reporting) and consider moving the examples block to a referenced file to improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly task-oriented but opens with persona padding Claude already knows ('expertise spans multiple programming languages with deep knowledge of software architecture principles and best practices'), fitting the 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation' anchor rather than the lean level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	It names concrete tools (Grep, ast-grep, jscpd) and one parameter ('--min-tokens 50'), but provides no executable or copy-paste-ready commands/examples, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor and falling short of the fully executable level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The six-step workflow (broad search → compile list → anti-patterns → naming → duplication → architecture) is clearly sequenced, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops, fitting the 'steps listed but validation gaps' anchor rather than the checkpointed level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is sectioned into responsibilities, workflow, and deliverables, but it is a monolithic single file over 50 lines with no external references and inline content (e.g., the examples block) that could be split out, matching the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

77%

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 with concrete capabilities and an explicit 'Use when' trigger, so completeness and specificity are strong. It is held back by somewhat narrow trigger-term coverage and overlap risk with broader code-review skills.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms to include natural user phrasings such as 'code review', 'code quality', 'code smells', or 'refactoring opportunities' alongside 'codebase consistency'.

Sharpen distinctiveness by foregrounding the unique angle (design patterns, anti-patterns, naming, duplication) so it is less likely to collide with general code-review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description enumerates multiple concrete actions — 'design patterns, anti-patterns, naming conventions, and duplication' — matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the single-domain anchor at 2.	3 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does and follows with an explicit 'Use when checking codebase consistency or verifying new code follows established patterns' trigger, satisfying the level-3 'both what AND when with explicit triggers' anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'codebase consistency' and 'verifying new code follows established patterns' are relevant triggers, but coverage of natural user phrasings is narrow and misses common variations like 'code review', 'code quality', or 'code smells'; not the broad term spread of the level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Pattern/anti-pattern/naming/duplication analysis is a recognizable niche, but 'checking codebase consistency' is broad enough to overlap with general code-review and quality skills, fitting the 'could still overlap with similar skills' anchor at 2.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 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/pattern-recognition-specialist/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.