CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

clean-code

Write readable, maintainable code through disciplined naming, small functions, and clean error handling. Use when the user mentions "code review", "naming conventions", "function too long", "code smells", "readable code", "boy scout rule", "single responsibility", or "unit test quality". Also trigger when reviewing pull requests for readability, refactoring messy functions, debating comment styles, or improving error handling patterns. Covers SRP, comment discipline, formatting, and unit testing. For refactoring techniques, see refactoring-patterns. For architecture, see clean-architecture.

Quality

87%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 framework skill: highly actionable pattern tables, a concrete scoring protocol, and exemplary progressive disclosure across six real reference files. The main cost is token efficiency — substantial conceptual re-explanation of well-known clean-code principles plus an irrelevant author bio and affiliate-linked reading list inflate the body without adding capability.

Suggestions

Remove or drastically compress the 'Why it works' paragraphs under each discipline — Claude already knows why small functions and meaningful names matter; keep only the non-obvious insights (e.g., the Step-Down Rule, define exception classes in terms of the caller's needs).

Delete the 'About the Author' section and trim 'Further Reading' to a plain untracked list of book titles — the author biography and affiliate-tagged Amazon links consume tokens without improving skill execution.

Fold the 'Common Mistakes' table into the reference files (or the Quick Diagnostic) since its rows largely restate the pattern tables above them, keeping the SKILL.md body focused on the framework map and the scoring/audit workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The pattern tables, scoring rubric, and Quick Diagnostic are dense and useful, but the six 'Core concept'/'Why it works' paragraph pairs re-explain clean-code fundamentals Claude already knows (e.g., 'Small functions are easy to name, easy to understand, easy to test'), and the author bio and affiliate-tagged Further Reading section add padding that could be trimmed or cut.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete before/after examples throughout every discipline ('elapsedTimeInDays' not 'd', 'renderForPrint()' and 'renderForScreen()' not 'render(isPrint)', 'shouldRejectExpiredToken' not 'test1'), a defined 0-10 scoring protocol with required outputs, and a diagnostic checklist mapping each failure to a specific action — for an instruction-only skill, specific examples cover the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Scoring section ('rate it 0-10... Always provide the current score and specific improvements needed to reach 10/10') and the Question/If-No/Action diagnostic give a clear, checkpointed sequence for the two main use cases (reviewing and auditing). Not 5 because there is no explicit feedback/error-recovery loop when applying the framework to non-trivial refactors.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Each discipline ends with a well-signaled one-level-deep reference ('See: [references/naming-conventions.md]'), all six referenced files exist with substantial content, and a Reference Files index summarizes each one — a clean overview with appropriately split detail and easy navigation.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

91%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 strong description: concrete capability list, explicit and richly varied 'Use when' triggers, and explicit cross-references to sibling skills for boundary disambiguation. The only weaknesses are the slightly generic leading action phrase and the broad 'code review' trigger that could collide with dedicated review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific capabilities — 'disciplined naming, small functions, and clean error handling' plus 'Covers SRP, comment discipline, formatting, and unit testing' — but the leading action 'write readable, maintainable code' is generic and code smells appear only in triggers, leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Write readable, maintainable code through... Covers SRP, comment discipline, formatting, and unit testing') and when ('Use when the user mentions... Also trigger when reviewing pull requests...') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-term coverage with synonyms: 'code review', 'naming conventions', 'function too long', 'code smells', 'readable code', 'boy scout rule', 'single responsibility', 'unit test quality', plus scenario phrases like 'refactoring messy functions, debating comment styles'. No common variations a user would naturally say are missing.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Explicitly disambiguates sibling skills ('For refactoring techniques, see refactoring-patterns. For architecture, see clean-architecture'), but the broad 'code review' trigger and 'refactoring messy functions' overlap with dedicated code-review and refactoring skills, leaving minor conflict risk.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

valeriibeck-star/claude-skills

Path

skills/clean-code/SKILL.md

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.