CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

slate-ar-stabilize

Slate v2 behavior-stability mini-skill. Runs existing editor behavior gates, routes repeated failures to slate-patch, and keeps looping until the surface is stable or blocked.

62

Quality

75%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/slate-ar-stabilize/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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 body is a lean, well-structured stabilization loop with concrete command routing, explicit validation checkpoints, feedback loops, and a completion checklist; the only weakness is minor inferential load in phrases like "narrowest existing behavior gate".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean ~44-line body with no concept over-explanation; "This is an expert override" and the slate-ar-perfect aside add genuinely useful routing context rather than padding, fitting the lean/efficient score-5 anchor better than the score-4 'minor over-explanation' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance via named commands (slate-ar-status, slate-ar-gate, slate-patch, tdd) with a numbered procedure, but terms like "the narrowest existing behavior gate" still require inference, matching score-4 rather than the copy-paste-ready score-5 anchor.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops ("if the same valid gate fails twice, stop gating and fix", "rerun the focused gate after each fix", "broaden only after focused proof is green"), plus a Completion checklist — matching the score-5 anchor; the stabilization loop is not a destructive batch operation, so the cap-to-3 rule does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no external references needed and clear section headers (Contract, Completion, Handoff); per the simple-skills note this qualifies for a score-5 on progressive disclosure.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 concretely states what the skill does and is reasonably distinct, but it omits any explicit "Use when..." trigger guidance and relies on internal jargon rather than natural user phrases, capping completeness and trigger-term quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g. 'Use when the user wants editor behavior regressions gone: selection, typing, copy/paste, IME, focus, undo/redo').

Surface the concrete behavior surfaces (selection, typing, IME, etc.) currently buried in the body into the description to lift trigger-term quality.

Reframe jargon like 'behavior-stability mini-skill' and 'slate-patch' so a user could naturally say the trigger terms without knowing internal tool names.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete actions — "Runs existing editor behavior gates, routes repeated failures to slate-patch, and keeps looping until the surface is stable or blocked" — with only minor gaps in coverage, fitting the score-4 anchor better than the comprehensive score-5 anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

Provides a clear "what" but no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause; per the judging guidelines a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 3, which is a better fit than score-4 (which requires an explicit, if imperfect, "when").

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains some relevant keywords ("editor behavior", "behavior-stability", "slate-patch") but they skew toward internal jargon and miss the natural phrases a user would actually say (e.g. "selection", "typing", "regression"), matching the score-3 anchor rather than the score-2 (too generic) or score-4 (good natural coverage).

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tied to a specific slate-stabilization niche with distinct commands (slate-patch, behavior gates), giving mostly-distinct triggers with only minor overlap risk against the closely related slate-ar-perfect workflow.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.