CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/lcov-analysis

Parses both mainstream coverage interchange formats: LCOV `.info` text files (produced by gcov, llvm-cov, Coverage.py via `py2lcov`, JaCoCo via `xml2lcov`, Devel::Cover, Jest via `lcov` reporter, NYC, and most others) and Cobertura XML (coverage-04.dtd - emitted by JaCoCo, coverage.py `--xml`, Jest's `cobertura` reporter, coverlet, gocover-cobertura; full parser in references/cobertura.md). Extracts per-file line / function / branch metrics from the canonical record keywords (TN/SF/FN/FNDA/FNF/FNH/BRDA/BRF/BRH/DA/LH/LF), computes the diff vs a baseline, and emits per-file gating verdicts. Use for PR coverage gates that don't depend on a specific language runtime, whichever of the two formats the CI emits.

74

Quality

93%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

93%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.

A well-structured, executable skill body that pairs a complete parser with concrete gating rules and offloads depth to verified one-level references. Its only gap is the absence of an inline validation feedback loop in the gating workflow, which is otherwise delegated to a reference.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and dense — worked example, a complete executable parser, gate rules, an anti-pattern table, and limitations, all with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable copy-paste-ready `parse_lcov.py`, a concrete worked `.info` record, and specific gate thresholds (N=0.5, M=5, 80/70), with the diff/gate/CI implementation placed in verified reference files.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 4-step "How to use" sequence is clear with validation guidance (recompute totals, cache baseline, gate on three rules), but the batch/gate operation delegates the diff+gate+CI to a reference and lacks an explicit inline validate→fix→retry feedback loop in the body, keeping it just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references to real bundle files (references/cobertura.md and references/format-diff-and-ci.md, both verified present), content appropriately split, and easy navigation via a References section.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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.

A dense, third-person description that names the formats, concrete actions, and an explicit use-when trigger. It is comprehensive on specificity and completeness with low conflict risk; only trigger-term naturalness sits marginally below the top anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "Parses both mainstream coverage interchange formats", "Extracts per-file line / function / branch metrics", "computes the diff vs a baseline", "emits per-file gating verdicts" — alongside the exact record keywords and tool emitters, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers "what" (parse/diff/gate the two coverage formats) and "when" via the explicit "Use for PR coverage gates that don't depend on a specific language runtime" trigger clause.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural-term coverage ("LCOV", "`.info`", "Cobertura XML", "PR coverage gates") plus many tool names, but the phrasing leans technical and could add a few more plain-user synonyms; sits just below the comprehensive anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche — coverage-interchange parsing and PR gating across two named formats — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against unrelated skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents