CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

edit-package-readme

Create or edit package README.md files in the AI SDK monorepo.

Quality

79%

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 ./skills/edit-package-readme/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

100%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 model of token-efficient convention documentation: an ordered list of requirements, a complete copy-paste template, and an explicit exceptions list, all with zero filler. It fully fits the simple-skill exceptions in the rubric for workflow clarity and progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every line conveys repo-specific convention ("Detailed documentation belongs exclusively in `content/` and lives under `https://ai-sdk.dev/docs`") with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

The numbered required-section list ("1. H1 (`#`) with a descriptive package title..."), the complete fenced markdown template with `npm i` and TypeScript usage blocks, and the exact docs-link phrasing give copy-paste-ready guidance covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple single-purpose skill where the required sections are given "in the given order" (1-6) plus a template and an explicit exceptions list, making the single action unambiguous; no destructive or batch operations are involved, so the validation cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is under 50 lines with no need for external references (none exist in the bundle) and is organized into clear sections (`## Template`, `## Exceptions`), with the short four-package exception list appropriately kept inline.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 is concise and clearly scoped to a specific niche, but it only states what the skill does without any trigger guidance for when to use it, and it lacks natural phrasing variations. Adding a 'Use when...' clause would address the completeness cap.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when creating, editing, or updating the README.md of a package in the AI SDK monorepo."

Include natural user phrasings such as "write", "update", or "docs page" so the description matches how users actually ask for this task.

Mention the key constraint inline (e.g., that READMEs must stay minimal with details belonging in content/) to sharpen the 'what' beyond two near-synonymous actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Create or edit package README.md files in the AI SDK monorepo" names the domain and two concrete actions ("Create or edit"), matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage; the actions are near-synonymous, so it does not reach the 'several specific actions' of level 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear ("Create or edit package README.md files in the AI SDK monorepo") but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines; not level 2 because the 'what' is concrete rather than vague.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords are present ("README.md", "package", "AI SDK monorepo") but common variations users would naturally say — "write", "update", "docs", "documentation" — are missing, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' anchor rather than level 4's good coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The scoping to "the AI SDK monorepo" gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, but a generic README- or documentation-writing request in that repo could overlap with closely related skills, matching the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' anchor rather than level 5's distinct triggers.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository

vercel/ai

Path

skills/edit-package-readme/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.