The description is technically specific and clearly describes a well-scoped capability for scaffolding React components with a defined structure. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which limits its completeness score, and some of the terminology is project-specific jargon rather than natural user language. Adding trigger guidance and more natural keywords would significantly improve skill selection accuracy.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to create a new React component, scaffold a component, or add a component to the project.'

Include more natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'create component', 'new component', 'generate component', or 'add component'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: scaffolding React components, organizing by category (types, FC module, Tailwind-only styling, barrel exports), and following a create-component manifest. These are concrete, actionable capabilities.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers 'what does this do' (scaffolds React components with types, FC module, Tailwind styling, barrel exports), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps this at 2 per the rubric.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant keywords like 'React component', 'Tailwind', 'barrel exports', and 'src/components', but misses common user phrasings like 'create component', 'new component', 'generate component', or 'add component'. The term 'create-component manifest' is project-specific jargon that users may not naturally say.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Highly specific niche: scaffolding React components under a particular directory structure with a specific manifest pattern. Unlikely to conflict with other skills due to the specificity of 'create-component manifest', Tailwind-only styling, and barrel exports.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Implementation

70%

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

This is a well-structured scaffolding skill with clear workflow sequencing and good organization. Its main weakness is that Steps 1 and 2 describe the desired output in prose rather than providing complete executable code templates, reducing actionability. The content could also be slightly more concise by trimming conversational phrases and the redundant Goal section.

Suggestions

Add complete, copy-paste-ready code templates for Step 1 (types file) and Step 2 (component file) with placeholders, similar to how Step 3 already provides a concrete code block.

Remove or compress the 'Goal' section since it restates what the steps and checklist already convey, saving tokens.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation (e.g., the placeholder table could be tighter, the 'Goal' section restates what's already clear from the steps). Some phrasing like 'so the file is obviously wired' is conversational padding. Overall mostly lean but not maximally tight.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides clear structural guidance and one concrete code snippet (the barrel export), but Steps 1 and 2 describe what to do rather than providing complete, copy-paste-ready code templates. The types file and component file are described in prose rather than shown as executable examples, making them less immediately actionable.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The three-step sequence is clearly ordered and logically structured, with a file checklist serving as a verification step. Since this is a non-destructive scaffolding operation (creating new files), the workflow is appropriately simple and unambiguous without needing error-recovery feedback loops.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a standalone skill with no bundle files, the content is well-organized into clear sections (Context, Inputs, Steps 1-3, Checklist, Rules, Goal). The skill is under 80 lines and doesn't need external references; the section structure provides good navigation and progressive detail.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

16 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation