golang-patterns
tessl i github:ysyecust/everything-claude-code --skill golang-patternsIdiomatic Go patterns, best practices, and conventions for building robust, efficient, and maintainable Go applications.
Validation
69%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (674 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
description_trigger_hint | Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 11 / 16 Passed | |
Implementation
65%This is a solid Go patterns reference with excellent actionability - nearly every concept has executable code examples with clear good/bad comparisons. The main weaknesses are its length (could be split into focused sub-documents) and some unnecessary explanatory prose that Claude doesn't need. The quick reference table at the end is a nice touch for rapid lookup.
Suggestions
Split into focused sub-documents (e.g., CONCURRENCY.md, ERROR_HANDLING.md, INTERFACES.md) with SKILL.md as an overview pointing to each
Remove explanatory sentences like 'Go favors simplicity over cleverness' - let the code examples speak for themselves
Add a brief 'When reviewing Go code, check for:' checklist to provide workflow guidance
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive but includes some explanatory text that Claude already knows (e.g., 'Go favors simplicity over cleverness'). The code examples are valuable but some sections could be tightened - the anti-patterns section repeats concepts already covered. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Excellent actionability with fully executable, copy-paste ready code examples throughout. Every pattern includes concrete, working Go code with clear good/bad comparisons. The tooling section provides specific commands. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While individual patterns are clear, there's no explicit workflow for applying these patterns during development. The skill lacks validation checkpoints or a clear sequence for when to apply which patterns. For a reference skill this is acceptable but could benefit from a 'how to use this guide' section. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's a monolithic document (~400 lines) that could benefit from splitting into separate files (e.g., CONCURRENCY.md, ERROR_HANDLING.md). No external references are provided for deeper dives. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Activation
22%This description is too abstract and lacks actionable specificity. It reads more like a tagline than a functional description that would help Claude select this skill appropriately. The absence of concrete actions and explicit trigger conditions significantly limits its utility for skill selection.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause specifying triggers like 'when writing Go/golang code', 'reviewing .go files', or 'asking about Go idioms'
Replace abstract terms with concrete actions such as 'Reviews Go code for idiomatic patterns, suggests error handling improvements, implements interfaces and goroutines'
Include common trigger terms users would say: 'golang', '.go', 'goroutines', 'channels', 'Go modules'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses abstract language like 'idiomatic patterns', 'best practices', and 'conventions' without listing any concrete actions. It doesn't specify what Claude actually does (e.g., 'reviews code', 'suggests refactoring', 'generates Go code'). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description only vaguely addresses 'what' (patterns and practices) and completely lacks any 'when' guidance. There is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'Go' and 'Go applications' which users would naturally say, but misses common variations like 'golang', '.go files', or specific Go concepts users might mention (goroutines, channels, error handling). | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'Go' provides some specificity, 'best practices' and 'patterns' are generic enough to potentially conflict with other coding or language-specific skills. The description doesn't carve out a clear niche. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
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.