Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
BAD: "You should basically just run the tests to make sure everything is actually working correctly" GOOD: "Run tests to verify functionality"
Use Concrete Numbers
BAD: "Keep functions small and avoid deeply nested code" GOOD: "Limit functions to 50 lines. Limit nesting to 3 levels."
Active Voice
BAD: "The configuration should be validated before the application is started" GOOD: "Validate configuration before starting the application"
Front-Load Important Info
BAD: "When you're working with user input, which could potentially contain malicious data, it's important to remember that you should always validate and sanitize it" GOOD: "Always validate and sanitize user input"
Parallel Structure
BAD:
Check that the file exists
Making sure permissions are correct
You should verify the contents
GOOD:
Check file exists
Verify permissions
Validate contents
Delete Hedge Words
BAD: "This might help improve performance somewhat" GOOD: "This improves performance by 30%" or "This may improve performance. Benchmark to verify."
Review Process
Read skill at $ARGUMENTS
Check frontmatter for required fields
Evaluate context efficiency
Apply technical writing check
Verify structure and flow
Test code examples
Check for anti-patterns
Assess scope
Validate verification steps
Output Format
## Skill Review: [skill-name]### Summary
[1-2 sentence overview]
### Strengths- [What works well]
- [Effective patterns]
### Issues Found#### Critical (Must Fix)- [ ] [Issue] - Location: [section/line]
#### Recommendations (Should Fix)- [ ] [Recommendation] - Location: [section/line]
#### Suggestions (Nice to Have)- [ ] [Suggestion] - Location: [section/line]
### Context Efficiency Score
[1-5]: [Brief explanation]- 5: Extremely concise, every word necessary
- 4: Mostly efficient, minor verbosity
- 3: Acceptable, some trimming needed
- 2: Verbose, significant trimming needed
- 1: Bloated, major revision required
### Technical Writing Quality
[1-5]: [Brief explanation]- 5: Precise, concise, active voice, no filler
- 4: Mostly clear, minor improvements
- 3: Acceptable, some verbosity/vagueness
- 2: Significant clarity issues, passive voice, filler
- 1: Unclear, verbose, imprecise
### Overall Assessment
[Pass/Pass with Recommendations/Needs Revision]
### Specific Improvements```diff
[Show diffs for suggested changes]
## Common Skill Smells
### The Encyclopedia
**Symptom:** Exhaustive domain coverage
**Fix:** Break into focused skills or link to docs
### The CLAUDE.md Duplicate
**Symptom:** Project-specific conventions
**Fix:** Move to CLAUDE.md, keep domain knowledge in skill
### The Vague Guide
**Symptom:** Generic advice ("write clean code")
**Fix:** Provide specific, actionable guidance
### The Context Hog
**Symptom:** 1000+ lines, auto-loaded
**Fix:** Compress, split, or make invokable-only
### The Rigid Workflow
**Symptom:** Overly prescriptive steps
**Fix:** Provide guidance and checkpoints, allow adaptation
### The Missing Verification
**Symptom:** Implementation without validation
**Fix:** Add verification steps, success criteria, tests
### The Assumption Maker
**Symptom:** "Update the config" (which file? where?)
**Fix:** Explicit paths, patterns, or discovery method
### The Verbose Writer
**Symptom:** Filler words, passive voice, redundancy
**Fix:** Apply technical writing principles
## Examples
### Good Knowledge Skill
```markdown
---
name: api-conventions
description: REST API design conventions for our microservices
---
# API Conventions
## URL Structure
- Use kebab-case: `/api/v1/user-profiles`
- Version in path: `/v1/`, `/v2/`
- Collection naming: plural (`/users`, not `/user`)
## Request/Response
- camelCase for JSON properties
- ISO 8601 timestamps: `2024-01-15T10:30:00Z`
- Wrap lists: `{ "data": [...], "meta": { "total": 100 } }`
## Pagination
- Cursor-based for large datasets
- Include `next`, `prev` in meta
- Max 100 items per page
## Error Handling
- Use RFC 7807 Problem Details
- Include `type`, `title`, `status`, `detail`
Why it passes: Concise, focused, provides patterns Claude can't infer, scannable, no prose.
Good Workflow Skill
---
name: fix-security-issue
description: Fix security vulnerability following our security workflow
disable-model-invocation: true
---# Fix Security Issue
Fix security issue $ARGUMENTS following our security review process.
## Steps1.**Analyze vulnerability** -`gh issue view $ARGUMENTS` to read security issue
- Identify CWE category and severity
- Understand attack vector
2.**Find affected code** - Search for vulnerable patterns using Grep
- Check for similar instances elsewhere
- Review history: `git log -p --grep="$PATTERN"`3.**Implement fix** - Address root cause, not symptoms
- Follow secure patterns from `.claude/skills/security-patterns/` - Update all affected locations
4.**Write security tests** - Test reproduces vulnerability
- Verify test fails on old code
- Verify test passes on fixed code
- Add edge case tests
5.**Validate fix** -`npm test` -`npm run security-scan` -`npm run lint`6.**Document and commit** - Add security comment explaining fix
-`security: fix [CWE-XXX] in [component]` - Reference issue: `Fixes #$ARGUMENTS`7.**Create PR** -`gh pr create --template security` - Request @security-team review
- Add `security` label
## Verification- [ ] Security test added and passing
- [ ] All tests passing
- [ ] Security scanner clean
- [ ] Similar patterns checked
- [ ] Security team assigned
---
name: make-code-better
description: Improves code quality
---# Code Improvement Guide
This skill helps you write better, cleaner, more maintainable code.
## General Principles
Always write clean code that is easy to read. Make sure your code
follows best practices. Remember that code is read more often than
it's written.
## Things to Consider- Make your code modular
- Add appropriate comments
- Follow DRY principle
- Use meaningful names
- Keep functions small
- Write tests
- Handle errors
- Optimize performance
- Make it scalable
- Consider security
Why it fails:
Too vague (generic advice)
No actionable steps
Missing disable-model-invocation flag
Bloated prose
No verification
No examples
Unclear when to use
Fix: Split into focused skills (security-patterns, testing-patterns), provide examples, add verification, make context-efficient.
Technical Writing Improvement
BEFORE (verbose):
## Error Handling
When working with API calls, it's important to handle errors properly.
You should catch exceptions and log them so you can debug issues later.
It's also a good idea to provide meaningful error messages.
AFTER (concise):
## Error Handling- Catch all exceptions
- Log to monitoring (Sentry, Datadog)
- Return user-friendly messages (hide stack traces)
```javascript
try {
await api.call()
} catch (error) {
logger.error('API failed', { error, context })
throw new UserError('Unable to process request')
}
**Improvements:** Eliminated filler, active voice, specific tools, added code, 60% shorter with more info.
## References
Based on Claude Code best practices:
- https://code.claude.com/docs/en/best-practices
- https://code.claude.com/docs/en/skills
- https://code.claude.com/docs/en/how-claude-code-works
## Usage
