CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

coding-standards

Baseline cross-project coding conventions for naming, readability, immutability, and code-quality review. Use detailed frontend or backend skills for framework-specific patterns.

56

Quality

66%

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/coding-standards/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is coding-standards in affaan-m/ECC

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable with concrete executable examples, but it is verbose for a baseline standards skill — re-teaching concepts Claude already knows — and lacks progressive disclosure, presenting everything inline as a single long document.

Suggestions

Trim or remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows (KISS/DRY/YAGNI definitions, basic immutability via spread, plain useState usage); keep only the project-specific conventions.

Split the large body into one-level-deep reference files (e.g., naming, error handling, React patterns, testing) and have SKILL.md serve as a concise overview with signaled links.

Since this is a reference rather than a process skill, the workflow_clarity ceiling is acceptable; focus token savings on conciseness and progressive disclosure instead.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Examples are individually efficient, but the ~540-line body explains well-known concepts (KISS/DRY/YAGNI definitions, basic spread-immutability, plain useState) that Claude already knows, adding bulk that does not earn its place.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable TypeScript PASS/FAIL code pairs, specific REST conventions, and JSDoc/test patterns that are concrete and copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

'When to Activate' and 'Scope Boundaries' give clear activation guidance, but as a reference skill there is no sequenced multi-step process with validation checkpoints; it lists conditions rather than a workflow.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, so referenced paths are routing pointers to other skills; the body is a monolithic wall of standards that could be split into separate reference files with clear one-level-deep navigation.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 specific and well-deconflicted, naming concrete capability areas and routing away from framework-specific siblings. It falls short on completeness and trigger coverage by lacking an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and common user phrasings.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause stating when to activate this skill (e.g., 'Use when reviewing code quality, enforcing naming/formatting consistency, or onboarding contributors to conventions').

Include more natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'code review', 'linting rules', 'style guide', or 'formatting standards'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions/domains — 'naming, readability, immutability, and code-quality review' — naming several specific capabilities rather than vague language.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers what the skill does, but 'when' is only implied via the framework-routing sentence; there is no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 2 per the guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Has relevant natural terms ('coding conventions', 'naming', 'code-quality review') but omits common variations users would say like 'linting', 'code review', or 'style guide'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'Baseline cross-project' framing plus explicit routing to 'detailed frontend or backend skills' carves a clear niche unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (552 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
ysyecust/everything-claude-code
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.