CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/policy-as-code-runner

Configures policy-as-code testing using OPA / Conftest / Cedar - authors policies in Rego (OPA's language), runs Conftest against Kubernetes manifests / Terraform plans / Dockerfiles / arbitrary structured data, integrates with CI for PR-time policy gates. Per OPA's docs: "an open source, general-purpose policy engine that unifies policy enforcement across the stack." Use to express + enforce custom policies (cost limits, tagging requirements, security baselines) that Checkov / tfsec / KICS don't cover.

73

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

80%

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 and concise, with a clear step sequence and strong executable examples, but it lacks explicit validation feedback loops and does not split its many inline policy examples into one-level-deep reference files. Adding a validate-fix-retry loop and externalizing full policies into bundled reference files would raise the two weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation feedback loop after Step 7 and Step 8 (e.g., "If `opa test` or `conftest test` reports failures, fix the policy/config and re-run before proceeding") to make validation checkpoints and error recovery explicit.

Move the full Kubernetes, Terraform, and Dockerfile Rego policy examples (Steps 2, 5, 6) into separate files under a `policies/` bundle directory and reference them one level deep, so the SKILL.md body stays an overview.

Trim the OPA docs blockquote and the Rego learning-curve limitation text to the essential facts to push conciseness from good to fully lean.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and predominantly executable code/commands with minimal prose, assuming Claude's competence without re-explaining OPA/Conftest/Kubernetes; only minor padding (the OPA docs blockquote and the Rego learning-curve limitation) keeps it from being perfectly lean.

3 / 3

Actionability

Every step ships complete, runnable code or shell commands — install commands, full Rego policies, conftest/helm/terraform invocations, an `opa test` policy suite, and a copy-paste CI YAML — matching the executable copy-paste-ready anchor.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Steps are clearly sequenced and a validation step exists (Step 7 `opa test`, plus CI-before-Gatekeeper ordering), but explicit validation checkpoints and error-recovery feedback loops are implicit rather than spelled out.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the ~240-line body inlines multiple full Rego/YAML policies that could live as separate referenced files; sections are well-labeled but content that should be split out is inline.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

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 strong across all dimensions: it names concrete actions, uses natural trigger terms, explicitly pairs what-and-when guidance, and carves out a distinct niche relative to sibling scanner skills. No changes needed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions across distinct targets: "authors policies in Rego", "runs Conftest against Kubernetes manifests / Terraform plans / Dockerfiles", "integrates with CI for PR-time policy gates" — matching the comprehensive multiple-actions anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Answers both "what" (configures testing, authors policies, runs Conftest, integrates CI) and "when" via the explicit trigger "Use to express + enforce custom policies ... that Checkov / tfsec / KICS don't cover".

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Uses the natural vocabulary a policy-as-code user would actually say — OPA, Conftest, Cedar, Rego, Kubernetes manifests, Terraform plans, Dockerfiles, CI, Checkov / tfsec / KICS — giving good coverage of real trigger terms.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (custom policy-as-code layer) and explicitly differentiates from sibling scanners ("that Checkov / tfsec / KICS don't cover"), making wrong-skill triggering unlikely.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents