Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
218
skills/skill-evaluator/SKILL.md
Normal file
218
skills/skill-evaluator/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,218 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: skill-evaluator
|
||||
description: Evaluate Claude Code skills against best practices including size, structure, examples, and prompt engineering quality. Provides comprehensive analysis with actionable suggestions.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Claude Code Skill Evaluator
|
||||
|
||||
Systematically evaluate Claude Code skills for quality, compliance with best practices, and optimization opportunities. Provides detailed assessment with actionable suggestions for improvement.
|
||||
|
||||
## Table of Contents
|
||||
|
||||
- [Instructions](#instructions)
|
||||
- [1. Find Skill](#1-find-skill)
|
||||
- [2. Read the Skill File](#2-read-the-skill-file)
|
||||
- [3. Analyze Against Best Practices](#3-analyze-against-best-practices)
|
||||
- [Dimension 1: Size & Length](#dimension-1-size--length)
|
||||
- [Dimension 2: Scope Definition](#dimension-2-scope-definition)
|
||||
- [Dimension 3: Description Quality](#dimension-3-description-quality)
|
||||
- [Dimension 4: Structure & Organization](#dimension-4-structure--organization)
|
||||
- [Dimension 5: Examples](#dimension-5-examples)
|
||||
- [Dimension 6: Anti-Pattern Detection](#dimension-6-anti-pattern-detection)
|
||||
- [Dimension 7: Prompt Engineering Quality](#dimension-7-prompt-engineering-quality)
|
||||
- [Dimension 8: Completeness](#dimension-8-completeness)
|
||||
- [4. Generate Comprehensive Evaluation Report](#4-generate-comprehensive-evaluation-report)
|
||||
- [5. Deliver Report to User](#5-deliver-report-to-user)
|
||||
- [Important Guidelines](#important-guidelines)
|
||||
- [Requirements](#requirements)
|
||||
- [Context & Standards](#context--standards)
|
||||
|
||||
## Instructions
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Find Skill
|
||||
|
||||
Identify the skill passed in the directory passed to you or find all in the user's `~/.claude/skills/` directory. For each directory (excluding hidden files), verify it contains a `SKILL.md` file.
|
||||
|
||||
Present the user with:
|
||||
- List of available skills
|
||||
- Ask which skill to evaluate (or accept skill name as input)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Read the Skill File
|
||||
|
||||
Once a skill is selected, read its `SKILL.md` file and extract:
|
||||
- Frontmatter metadata (name, description)
|
||||
- Total line count
|
||||
- Word count
|
||||
- Character count
|
||||
- Structure and sections
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Analyze Against Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
Evaluate the skill across **8 dimensions**:
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 1: Size & Length
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Body: Under 500 lines (hard maximum)
|
||||
- Name: Maximum 64 characters
|
||||
- Description: Maximum 1024 characters (200 char summary preferred)
|
||||
- Table of Contents: Include if over 100 lines
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Count total lines in SKILL.md body
|
||||
- Flag if over 500 lines
|
||||
- Compliment if well-sized (ideal: 100-300 lines for medium skills)
|
||||
- Check if TOC exists (expected for 100+ line skills)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 2: Scope Definition
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Narrow focus (one skill = one capability)
|
||||
- Clear boundary of what the skill does and doesn't do
|
||||
- No scope creep (e.g., "document processing" → "PDF form filling")
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Does the description clearly state what the skill does?
|
||||
- Are there multiple conflicting capabilities within one skill?
|
||||
- Is the boundary clear to a new user?
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 3: Description Quality
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Third-person voice (avoid "I can" or "you can")
|
||||
- Include both WHAT and WHEN TO USE
|
||||
- Specific, searchable terminology
|
||||
- 200 character summary ideal
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Voice and tone appropriate?
|
||||
- Discovery terms clear? (Would users search for these terms?)
|
||||
- Is "when to use" explained?
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 4: Structure & Organization
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Clear section hierarchy (headings, subsections)
|
||||
- Logical flow (progressive disclosure)
|
||||
- Step-by-step instructions preferred for workflows
|
||||
- Rules/constraints clearly stated
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Is structure logical?
|
||||
- Can a user easily navigate?
|
||||
- Are instructions sequential or scattered?
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 5: Examples
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Quality over quantity
|
||||
- Typical: 2-3 examples for basic skills, more for format-heavy
|
||||
- Concrete (not abstract)
|
||||
- Show patterns and edge cases
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- How many examples? (count them)
|
||||
- Are examples concrete and realistic?
|
||||
- Do they demonstrate key patterns?
|
||||
- Are there enough to show variations?
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 6: Anti-Pattern Detection
|
||||
**Red flags (check for these):**
|
||||
- ❌ Windows-style paths (should use forward slashes)
|
||||
- ❌ Magic numbers without justification
|
||||
- ❌ Vague terminology (inconsistent synonyms)
|
||||
- ❌ Time-sensitive instructions (date-dependent)
|
||||
- ❌ Deeply nested file references (over 2 levels)
|
||||
- ❌ Vague descriptions (missing WHAT or WHEN)
|
||||
- ❌ Scope creep (trying to do too much)
|
||||
- ❌ No error handling or validation steps
|
||||
- ❌ No user feedback loops (for complex workflows)
|
||||
- ❌ Multiple conflicting approaches for same task
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Count violations
|
||||
- Severity of each violation
|
||||
- Impact on usability
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 7: Prompt Engineering Quality
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Imperative language (verb-first instructions)
|
||||
- Explicit rules with clear boundaries
|
||||
- Validation loops where appropriate (especially for destructive ops)
|
||||
- Clear error handling
|
||||
- Assumes user is intelligent (don't over-explain)
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Is language imperative?
|
||||
- Are there validation steps?
|
||||
- How clear are the rules?
|
||||
- Is error handling explicit?
|
||||
|
||||
#### Dimension 8: Completeness
|
||||
**Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Requirements listed (what's needed to use the skill)
|
||||
- Edge cases acknowledged
|
||||
- Limitations stated where relevant
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- Are prerequisites clear?
|
||||
- Are limitations or edge cases mentioned?
|
||||
- Is scope of responsibility clear?
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Generate Comprehensive Evaluation Report
|
||||
|
||||
Create a detailed evaluation report with these components:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Executive Summary**: 1-2 paragraphs covering overall assessment, key strengths, and critical issues
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Metrics**: Present line count, word count, character count, and guideline compliance assessment
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Dimensional Analysis**: For each of the 8 dimensions:
|
||||
- Status indicator (✓ Pass / ⚠ Warning / ❌ Fail)
|
||||
- 1-2 sentence assessment explaining the rating
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Detected Issues**: Organize by severity:
|
||||
- Critical Issues (must fix) - any ❌ Fail items with explanation
|
||||
- Warnings (should address) - any ⚠ Warning items with explanation
|
||||
- Observations (minor items worth noting)
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Comparative Analysis**: Compare the skill against official skills repository patterns with examples and rationale
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Actionable Suggestions**: Numbered list of specific improvements, prioritized by impact:
|
||||
- High Priority (do this first)
|
||||
- Medium Priority (nice to have)
|
||||
- Low Priority (optional refinements)
|
||||
|
||||
Each suggestion should include concrete rationale, not vague guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Overall Assessment**:
|
||||
- Professional verdict on production-readiness
|
||||
- Clear recommendation (Keep as-is / Minor tweaks / Significant refactor / Major restructure)
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Deliver Report to User
|
||||
|
||||
Present the complete evaluation report to the user in a clear, formatted structure. Ensure:
|
||||
- Status indicators are visible (✓ Pass / ⚠ Warning / ❌ Fail)
|
||||
- Actionable suggestions are specific (not vague)
|
||||
- Rationale is explained for each issue
|
||||
- Prioritization is clear
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
- **Be brutally honest**: Point out real issues, don't sugarcoat
|
||||
- **Specific over vague**: "The examples don't show error handling" not "examples could be better"
|
||||
- **Professional tone**: Constructive criticism, not harsh
|
||||
- **Evidence-based**: Reference specific lines or patterns from the skill
|
||||
- **Proportional feedback**: Don't over-critique minor issues
|
||||
- **Future-focused**: Suggest improvements, not judgment
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
- User has installed skills in `~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
- Target skill has a valid `SKILL.md` file with frontmatter
|
||||
- User accepts the detailed, honest evaluation
|
||||
|
||||
## Context & Standards
|
||||
|
||||
This evaluator uses best practices from:
|
||||
- Official Anthropic Claude Code Skills documentation
|
||||
- Analysis of official skills repository patterns
|
||||
- Professional technical writing standards
|
||||
- Prompt engineering best practices for LLM interactions
|
||||
|
||||
All assessments are comparative to **official guidelines**, not arbitrary standards.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user