| name | skill-authoring |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| description | Author, audit, and improve Grafana SKILL.md files against Anthropic's published Agent Skills guidance and the four-dimension rubric the grafana/skills CI gate uses (conciseness, actionability, workflow clarity, progressive disclosure). Applies the canonical SKILL.md structure (YAML frontmatter + body + references/ + scripts/ + assets/), the "pushy description" trigger pattern, the three-level progressive-disclosure model, and the validate-fix-rerun feedback loop. Use when creating a new skill in this repo, when reviewing a skill PR, when a skill's Tessl review score is below 75 (the merge gate), when a skill's description isn't getting picked up by agents, when restructuring a long SKILL.md into a bundle, or when the user asks how to write, improve, optimize, audit, or fix a skill - even if they don't say "skill" explicitly (e.g. "this isn't triggering", "Tessl scored this 72", "split this doc"). |
Authoring & Improving Grafana Skills
How to write, review, and improve SKILL.md files so they pass the repo's CI gate and score well against the Anthropic-aligned rubric Tessl uses.
Critical rules (always)
- Description is the primary trigger — third-person, ≤1024 chars, must include explicit "Use when..." phrasing AND list concrete trigger terms users naturally say. See references/descriptions.md for the pushy-description pattern that combats undertriggering.
- Body under 500 lines — split into
references/*.md if approaching the limit. SKILL.md is the routing layer, not the entire knowledge base.
- One level of nesting for references — link from SKILL.md directly, never
SKILL.md → a.md → b.md. Claude may use head -100 previews on nested chains and miss content.
- Imperative voice — "Run X" not "You should run X" not "It is important to run X". Explain why over heavy-handed
MUST markers.
- Concrete examples beat prose — copy-paste-ready commands, real config snippets. Tessl's
actionability dimension scores this directly.
- No reserved words in
name — anthropic and claude are forbidden in skill names.
- No time-sensitive language in the body — "after August 2025…" rots. Use an
<details> "Old patterns" section for legacy info instead.
- Validate before committing —
./scripts/lint-skills.sh skills/<plugin>/<your-skill> clean + Tessl score ≥75 (run tessl skill review --json <dir>).
The rubric
CI fails any PR where a touched SKILL.md scores below 75 on four 0-3 dimensions: conciseness, actionability, workflow clarity, progressive disclosure. Full per-dimension scoring + Anthropic-doc mapping in references/rubric.md.
Score variance
The judge is an LLM and swings 7-10 points run-to-run. Local 94 commonly lands at CI 85. Ship only on three consecutive local 100s.
Decision tree for a new skill
-
What product / domain does this skill belong to?
Pick the right plugin folder: grafana-core/, grafana-cloud/, grafana-lgtm/, grafana-app-sdk/, grafana-k6/, grafana-plugins/. If none fits cleanly, ask the user before creating a new plugin group (a new group requires updating three marketplace.json files).
-
Estimate body length.
-
Write a "pushy" description first.
The description is the only thing always loaded into context. If agents don't trigger the skill, nothing else matters. See references/descriptions.md for the pattern.
-
Draft body with the four-dimension rubric in mind.
- Cut every sentence Claude already knows (Conciseness)
- Replace prose explanations with code blocks (Actionability)
- Number every multi-step procedure + add a validation step at the end (Workflow clarity)
- If you reach for
<details>, consider whether that content belongs in references/ instead (Progressive disclosure)
-
Register in marketplace manifests.
Add the skill path to the skills array in all three:
.claude-plugin/marketplace.json
.cursor-plugin/marketplace.json
.agents-plugin/marketplace.json
-
Validate locally.
./scripts/lint-skills.sh skills/<plugin>/<your-skill>
tessl skill review --json skills/<plugin>/<your-skill> | jq '.review.reviewScore'
tessl skill review --optimize --yes --max-iterations 3 skills/<plugin>/<your-skill>
If the run fails: read the lint error / Tessl suggestion, fix, re-run. Don't open the PR until both checks pass cleanly. The feedback-loop pattern beats one-shot writing.
Fixing a low-scoring existing skill
-
Read the judge's verbatim Suggestions text (non-JSON output):
tessl skill review skills/<plugin>/<name>
The Suggestions: block under each dimension names the exact sentences/sections to cut. Copy the suggestion — don't guess. Then verify the lowest dimension matches your read.
-
Apply the fix pattern from references/rubric.md:
- Conciseness 1-2 → cut intros, definitions, multi-line tables that mostly point to refs
- Actionability 1-2 → replace prose with code blocks and CLI commands
- Workflow clarity 1-2 → add numbered steps + validation checkpoints
- Progressive disclosure 1-2 → split into
references/*.md
-
If the skill is intentionally a routing document (like grafana-k6/k6-docs), don't let --optimize inline the bundle back into SKILL.md. Hand-craft a minimal copy-paste "validation loop" inline so SKILL.md is independently actionable, while preserving the bundle.
-
Re-score five times locally. Don't stop until all five runs hit 100 — see "Score variance" above for why.
Anti-patterns
See references/anti-patterns.md.
References