skill-review

📁 richtabor/agent-skills 📅 14 days ago
9
总安装量
5
周安装量
#32942
全站排名
安装命令
npx skills add https://github.com/richtabor/agent-skills --skill skill-review

Agent 安装分布

claude-code 5
cursor 2
antigravity 2
gemini-cli 2
continue 1
mcpjam 1

Skill 文档

Skill Review

Overview

Validates agent skills against the Agent Skills standard and compiled best practices. Reviews structure, frontmatter, description quality, progressive disclosure, and common anti-patterns.

When to Use

  • User asks to review or validate a skill
  • User is creating a new skill and wants feedback
  • User asks “is this skill well-written?”
  • User mentions skill quality, best practices, or improvement

Review Process

Phase 1: Load References

Before reviewing, read:

  • references/best-practices.md — Comprehensive guidelines
  • references/checklist.md — Quick validation checklist

Phase 2: Identify Target

Determine what to review:

  • Single skill: Review skills/<name>/SKILL.md and its structure
  • All skills: Audit entire skills/ directory
  • New skill draft: Review provided content before creation

Phase 3: Structural Audit

Check the skill directory structure:

skill-name/
├── SKILL.md              # Required
├── references/           # Optional - loaded docs
├── scripts/              # Optional - executable code
└── assets/               # Optional - output files (not loaded)

Verify:

  • SKILL.md exists
  • Directory name matches name in frontmatter
  • References are one level deep (no nested chains)
  • Scripts use forward slashes (no Windows paths)
  • No extraneous files (README.md, CHANGELOG.md, etc.)
  • Script paths in SKILL.md body (scripts/foo.py) exist in directory
  • If scripts use external binaries, dependencies are documented

Phase 4: Frontmatter Validation

Check YAML frontmatter:

---
name: skill-name          # Required: lowercase, hyphens, ≤64 chars
description: >-           # Required: ≤1024 chars, third-person
  What it does. When to use it.
---

Validate:

  • name: Lowercase with hyphens only ([a-z0-9-])
  • name: ≤64 characters
  • name: No “anthropic” or “claude” in name
  • description: Non-empty, ≤1024 characters
  • description: Third-person voice (not “I can” or “You can”)
  • description: Includes what it does AND when to trigger
  • description: Contains specific trigger phrases

Phase 5: Description Quality

The description is the triggering mechanism. Evaluate:

Good descriptions include:

  • Specific actions: “Extract text and tables from PDF files”
  • Trigger phrases: “Use when analyzing Excel files, spreadsheets, or .xlsx”
  • Synonyms users might say: “tabular data, CSV, workbooks”

Bad descriptions:

  • Vague: “Helps with documents”
  • Generic: “Processes data”
  • Missing triggers: “Analyzes spreadsheets” (no “when to use”)

Phase 6: Body Analysis

Review SKILL.md body content:

Length:

  • Under 500 lines (check with wc -l)
  • If longer, split into reference files

Progressive Disclosure:

  • Quick start or overview near top
  • Details moved to references/
  • Long reference files (>100 lines) have TOC

Token Efficiency:

  • No obvious explanations (Claude already knows)
  • Examples over lengthy prose
  • Each line justifies its token cost

Degrees of Freedom:

  • High freedom for context-dependent tasks
  • Low freedom for fragile/error-prone tasks
  • Defaults provided when multiple options exist

Phase 7: Anti-Pattern Check

Scan for common issues:

Anti-Pattern Look For
Windows paths scripts\file.py instead of scripts/file.py
Nested references A.md → B.md → C.md chains
Time-sensitive info “If before August 2025…”
Magic numbers Unexplained values
Too many options “You can use X, or Y, or Z…” without default
Inconsistent terms Mixing “endpoint”/”URL”/”route”
User-facing docs README, CHANGELOG, installation guides
First/second person descriptions “I can help” or “You can use”

Phase 8: Report Findings

Present findings using this format:

## Skill Review: [skill-name]

### Summary
[1-2 sentence overall assessment]

### Structure
[✓/✗] Directory organization
[✓/✗] File presence
[✓/✗] Reference depth

### Frontmatter
[✓/✗] name validation
[✓/✗] description validation

### Description Quality
**Score**: [Strong / Adequate / Needs Work]
**Issues**: [List specific problems]
**Suggested rewrite** (if needed):
```yaml
description: >-
  [Improved description]

Body Analysis

Line count: [X] lines Token efficiency: [Good / Could trim] Progressive disclosure: [✓/✗]

Anti-Patterns Found

  • [Issue 1] — Location: file:line
  • [Issue 2] — Location: file:line

Recommendations

  1. [Actionable fix]
  2. [Actionable fix]

## Quick Review Mode

For rapid validation, run through the checklist in `references/checklist.md` and report only failures.

## Resources

### references/best-practices.md
Comprehensive guide covering architecture, design principles, writing effective descriptions, bundled resources, workflow patterns, and advanced patterns from production skills.

### references/checklist.md
Quick-reference validation checklist for fast reviews.