CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

review-claudemd

Review recent conversations to find improvements for CLAUDE.md files.

60

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/review-claudemd/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

87%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 tight, highly actionable, and well-structured, but its batch-operation workflow lacks the validation checkpoints and feedback loops the rubric requires for batch/destructive operations, capping workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add validation checkpoints after extraction (e.g., verify the temp txt files are non-empty before batching) and after subagents run (e.g., confirm every batch was covered before aggregating).

Include a feedback loop for failures: what to do if jq parsing fails on a malformed jsonl, or if a subagent returns empty/no findings.

Specify how to handle the current-conversation exclusion concretely (the snippet comments 'Skip current conversation if known' but does not implement it), to make the batch step fully executable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and procedural with no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows; every line (bash snippets, prompt template, batching rules) earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready bash (sed/jq pipeline), a concrete subagent prompt template, and specific size-based batching thresholds, matching the fully-executable anchor covering common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four steps are clearly sequenced, but this is a batch operation (parallel subagents over many conversations) with no validation checkpoints or error-recovery feedback loops (e.g., verifying temp files are non-empty, checking subagent output coverage), which per the scoring notes caps workflow clarity at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, self-contained with no external references needed, and organized into clear Step sections, matching the simple-skill exception that allows a 5 with well-organized sections.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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 names a specific domain, but it states only what the skill does with no "when to use it" trigger guidance and only one concrete action, leaving it generic about when a user would invoke it.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g., "Use when the user wants to improve or update their CLAUDE.md memory files, or asks to learn from recent conversations").

List 2-3 concrete actions beyond "find improvements" (e.g., identify violated instructions, draft suggested additions, flag outdated rules) to lift specificity toward anchor 4-5.

Include common synonyms users might say ("update CLAUDE.md", "memory file", "project instructions") to improve trigger term coverage and distinctiveness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (conversations) and one concrete action ("find improvements for CLAUDE.md files"), matching the anchor that names a domain with 1-2 concrete actions but lacks comprehensive coverage.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear "what" (review conversations to improve CLAUDE.md) but no "Use when..." trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes "recent conversations" and "CLAUDE.md" but omits natural user phrasings like "update CLAUDE.md" or "improve instructions," matching the anchor for some relevant keywords missing common variations.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"CLAUDE.md" is a fairly distinct target with low overlap risk, fitting mostly-distinct anchor 4 rather than the fully-niche anchor 5 because the description is too brief to spell out fully distinct triggers.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
ykdojo/claude-code-tips
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.