tessl install https://github.com/softaworks/agent-toolkit --skill naming-analyzergithub.com/softaworks/agent-toolkit
Suggest better variable, function, and class names based on context and conventions.
Average Score
56%
Content
57%
Description
33%
Generated
Validations
Total score
13/16| Criteria | Score |
|---|---|
skill_md_line_count SKILL.md line count is 352 (<= 500) | |
frontmatter_valid YAML frontmatter is valid | |
name_field 'name' field is valid: 'naming-analyzer' | |
description_field 'description' field is valid (84 chars) | |
description_voice 'description' uses third person voice | |
description_trigger_hint Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | |
compatibility_field 'compatibility' field not present (optional) | |
allowed_tools_field 'allowed-tools' field not present (optional) | |
metadata_version 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | |
metadata_field 'metadata' field not present (optional) | |
license_field 'license' field is missing | |
frontmatter_unknown_keys No unknown frontmatter keys found | |
body_present SKILL.md body is present | |
body_examples Examples detected (code fence or 'Example' wording) | |
body_output_format Output/return/format terms detected | |
body_steps Step-by-step structure detected (ordered list) |
Content
Suggestions 4
Total score
8/12| Dimension | Score |
|---|---|
conciseness The skill contains useful information but is verbose with extensive examples that could be condensed. The report format template and multiple language convention sections add bulk that Claude could largely infer or generate on demand. | 2/3 |
actionability Provides concrete, executable code examples with clear before/after comparisons. The naming conventions, issue categories, and report format are specific and actionable with copy-paste ready patterns. | 3/3 |
workflow_clarity The numbered instruction steps provide a clear sequence for analysis, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints. The decision tree at the end helps, but there's no feedback loop for verifying naming improvements or handling edge cases. | 2/3 |
progressive_disclosure This is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. The extensive report format template, all language conventions, and detailed examples are inline when they could be split into separate reference files for conventions, report templates, and examples. | 1/3 |
Suggestions
Split language-specific conventions into a separate CONVENTIONS.md file and reference it from the main skill
Move the detailed report format template to a REPORT_TEMPLATE.md file to reduce main skill length
Add a validation step after renaming (e.g., 'Run tests to verify no regressions from renames')
Condense the 'Common Naming Issues' section - Claude can generate similar examples; focus on the categorization and rules instead
Overall Assessment
The skill provides highly actionable guidance with excellent concrete examples and clear naming conventions across multiple languages. However, it suffers from verbosity and poor progressive disclosure - cramming extensive reference material (report templates, all language conventions, decision trees) into a single file when these could be split into referenced documents. The workflow is clear but lacks validation steps for verifying naming improvements.
Description
Suggestions 3
Total score
7/12| Dimension | Score |
|---|---|
specificity Names the domain (naming) and lists the types of things it names (variable, function, class names), but doesn't describe concrete actions beyond 'suggest' - missing details like analyzing existing code, proposing alternatives, or explaining naming conventions. | 2/3 |
completeness Describes what it does (suggest better names) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 2, and this has no 'when' component at all. | 1/3 |
trigger_term_quality Includes relevant terms like 'variable', 'function', 'class names', and 'conventions', but misses common variations users might say like 'rename', 'naming conventions', 'better names', 'refactor names', or 'identifier names'. | 2/3 |
distinctiveness_conflict_risk Somewhat specific to naming suggestions, but could overlap with general code review skills, refactoring skills, or code quality skills that might also suggest naming improvements as part of broader functionality. | 2/3 |
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'rename', 'better name', 'naming convention', 'what should I call this', or 'improve variable names'
Expand concrete actions beyond 'suggest' - e.g., 'Analyzes code context to suggest better variable, function, and class names following language-specific conventions'
Include common file extensions or language contexts where naming conventions apply to improve distinctiveness
Overall Assessment
The description identifies a clear capability (suggesting better names for code elements) but lacks the explicit trigger guidance needed for Claude to know when to select this skill. It's moderately specific but would benefit from more concrete actions and natural trigger terms users would actually say when needing naming help.