CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

golden-html

Use when testing the html golden build

Quality

42%

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 ./tests/golden/phase2/html/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

22%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 an auto-generated HTML-scrape summary rather than usable skill guidance: verbose, descriptive instead of instructional, and lacking any workflow. It does organize references one level deep, but duplicates far too much detail inline.

Suggestions

Replace the auto-generated summary with concise instructions for what to do when testing the html golden build, removing the duplicated code examples and statistics blocks.

Add a clear multi-step workflow with a validation checkpoint (e.g. run the build, compare against the golden snapshot, report diffs) so the skill is actionable rather than descriptive.

Move the inlined code examples and tables into the references files, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview that links to references/page.md and references/index.md.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is an auto-generated documentation dump padded with redundant statistics sections, emoji headers, and a bloated x0..x59 variable example truncated with "...", matching "noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections"; it avoids score 1 only because it is data filler rather than lengthy explanations of concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 5

Actionability

The body lists extracted code snippets ("pip install thing", "print('hello')") and descriptive statistics but gives no instruction on what to do with this skill, matching "minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute"; it does not reach score 3 because there is no coherent actionable procedure.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

There is no workflow, sequence, or validation whatsoever — the body is a documentation index/summary with "Steps missing or incoherent; no sequence"; the simple-skill exception does not apply since this exceeds 50 lines and has no single coherent action.

1 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References are real and one level deep (body → references/index.md → references/page.md) and signaled in a Navigation section, but the bulk of the content (full code examples, tables, statistics) is inlined in SKILL.md rather than split out, matching "some structure... references present but not clearly signaled; content that should be separate is inline".

3 / 5

Total

8

/

20

Passed

Description

32%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 provides a trigger condition but omits what the skill does and relies on internal jargon, leaving it vague and incomplete. It is reasonably distinct from other skills only because of its niche project terminology.

Suggestions

Add a concrete 'what' clause naming the actions the skill performs, e.g. 'Runs and validates the html golden build suite, comparing output against the reference snapshot.'

Replace or supplement the jargon 'golden build' with natural user-facing trigger terms (e.g. 'golden build tests', 'html reference build', 'snapshot comparison').

State both what and when explicitly in third person, e.g. 'Runs the html golden build test suite and reports diffs. Use when testing the html golden build or verifying html output against the reference.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description "Use when testing the html golden build" names a domain (testing the html golden build) but describes zero concrete actions, falling at "names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" rather than the entirely-vague score 1 because a domain is at least identified.

2 / 5

Completeness

Only the "when" is present ("Use when testing the html golden build") with no statement of what the skill actually does, matching the anchor "only 'when' is present without 'what'"; it cannot reach score 3 which requires a clear 'what'.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"golden build" is project-internal jargon rather than a phrase a user would naturally say, and "testing"/"html" are generic; this matches "one or two generic keywords; missing the natural phrases users say" and is below score 3 which requires relevant keyword coverage.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "html golden build" niche is a distinctive project-specific trigger unlikely to overlap with unrelated skills, matching "mostly distinct; minor overlap risk"; it stops short of score 5 because the phrasing is terse and lacks explicit trigger synonyms.

4 / 5

Total

10

/

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

yusufkaraaslan/Skill_Seekers

Path

tests/golden/phase2/html/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.