CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

automation

Automation and verification guide for running Native SDK apps. Use when the user asks to test a running app, inspect runtime state, list windows, wait for readiness, drive widgets, take deterministic screenshots, send bridge commands, debug why automation is not connected, create smoke tests, or verify a Native SDK example in a GUI-capable session.

72

Quality

91%

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

85%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 highly actionable, well-sequenced operational guide with executable commands, exact error semantics, and strong validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are inlined reference-grade detail (per-command semantics, file protocol) with zero bundle files, and cross-section repetition of the same caveats.

Suggestions

Move the per-command semantics (workflow steps 6-16), the file protocol spec, and the CI/smoke-test patterns into reference files (e.g. references/commands.md, references/file-protocol.md), leaving SKILL.md a lean overview with one-level-deep, clearly signaled pointers.

Deduplicate the WebView/DOM exclusion caveat — state it once in a scope section and drop the repeats in 'What automation cannot verify', the intro, and Notes; same for screenshot determinism, which is explained in three places.

Split the 300-word snapshot.txt bullet into a short header-line summary plus a keyed list (protocol, dispatch_errors, frame_profile, error events) so the file protocol section scans instead of requiring a single dense paragraph.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body assumes competence (no basic-concept padding) and nearly every sentence carries non-obvious operational detail like error names and failure modes. Not 5 because there is real repetition that could be trimmed — WebView/DOM exclusion is stated in four places ('Automation is not browser DOM automation', 'Screenshots of WebView content', the Notes section, and 'WebView DOM interaction is intentionally out of scope') and screenshot determinism is re-explained in the intro, workflow step 12, the Screenshots section, and Notes; not 3 because the padding is redundancy of genuinely operational content, not generic explanation.

4 / 5

Actionability

Everything is copy-paste executable: exact CLI invocations ('native automate assert --timeout-ms 10000 \'4 open\'', 'zig build run -Dplatform=macos -Dautomation=true'), complete JSON payloads, exact error identifiers ('WheelTargetUnknown', 'permission_denied'), and a concrete RuntimeOptions wiring snippet. Not 4 because the examples cover the common cases completely, including failure paths.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 16-step standard workflow is clearly sequenced with validation checkpoints (wait for 'ready=true', polling asserts, error-event greps), the smoke-test pattern ends in explicit failure conditions ('Fails on timeout or unexpected bridge response'), and the debugging section is an ordered diagnostic ladder with feedback loops (protocol mismatch → rebuild the older side; stale instance → kill and relaunch). Not 4 because checkpoints are explicit at every phase, not implicit.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The file is a ~250-line monolith with no bundle files at all — per-command semantics (workflow steps 6-16), the file protocol spec, and CI guidance are all inlined where reference files would keep SKILL.md an overview. It matches the anchor 'some structure... content that should be separate is inline': section headers are clear, but nothing is split out. Not 4 because there are no well-signaled references at all — the only external pointer is 'native skills get core --full'; not 2 because the single file is itself well-sectioned and navigable.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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: it states the domain, enumerates specific capabilities, and gives an explicit multi-clause 'Use when...' trigger list. Voice is third-person and appropriately concise.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists roughly ten concrete actions — 'test a running app, inspect runtime state, list windows, wait for readiness, drive widgets, take deterministic screenshots, send bridge commands, debug why automation is not connected, create smoke tests' — covering the skill comprehensively. Not 4 because coverage of capabilities is broad and every action is specific, with no generic filler.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: 'what' ('Automation and verification guide for running Native SDK apps') and 'when' ('Use when the user asks to test a running app, ... or verify a Native SDK example in a GUI-capable session') with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit, not merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like 'drive widgets', 'take deterministic screenshots', 'create smoke tests', and 'debug why automation is not connected' match what a user would actually say. Not 5 because a few plausible trigger variants are absent — e.g. the CLI name 'native automate', 'CI checks', 'UI test', or 'GUI automation' as synonym phrasing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche — Native SDK runtime/GUI automation — with distinct triggers ('Native SDK', 'GUI-capable session', 'drive widgets') and explicit scoping that avoids collision with browser/DOM automation skills. Not 4 because no closely related skill would plausibly claim these triggers.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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
vercel-labs/native
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.