skill-improvement
Use when optimizing existing Claude skills, checking skill quality, auditing skill compliance, or when skills have obvious issues. Triggers on skill optimiza...
Description
name: skills-improvement description: Use when optimizing existing Claude skills, checking skill quality, auditing skill compliance, or when skills have obvious issues. Triggers on skill optimization requests, quality checks, or skill improvement tasks.
Skills Improvement
Overview
Systematically optimize skill quality through a diagnostic-report-select-execute-verify workflow. Ensure skills comply with Claude's official best practices for maximum effectiveness.
Core principle: If you didn't diagnose a skill, you don't know what to fix.
Workflow
digraph workflow {
"1. Diagnose" [shape=box];
"2. Report" [shape=box];
"3. Select" [shape=box];
"4. Execute" [shape=box];
"5. Verify" [shape=box];
"1. Diagnose" -> "2. Report";
"2. Report" -> "3. Select";
"3. Select" -> "4. Execute";
"4. Execute" -> "5. Verify";
"5. Verify" -> "3. Select" [label="fail"];
}
Phase 1: Diagnose
Scan skill for quality issues across 4 categories.
Categories:
- Metadata (HIGH): name, description, keywords
- Architecture (MEDIUM): file structure, progressive disclosure
- Text (MEDIUM): conciseness, clarity, token efficiency
- Code (HIGH): error handling, dependencies, validation
Process:
- Read SKILL.md and all referenced files
- Apply diagnostic checklist (see references/diagnostic-checklist.md)
- Record each issue with category, location, severity
Output: Raw issue list
Detailed checklist: See diagnostic-checklist.md
Phase 2: Report
Present findings in structured format.
Report structure:
# Skill Diagnostic Report: [name]
**Grade:** [A/B/C/D]
**Issues:** X total (Y high, Z medium, W low)
## High Priority (Y)
[Issues that prevent discovery or execution]
## Medium Priority (Z)
[Issues that impact quality or usability]
## Low Priority (W)
[Minor improvements]
For each issue include:
- Category and check ID
- Current state vs expected state
- Impact explanation
- Specific fix recommendation
- Reference to quality standard
Report templates: See report-templates.md
Phase 3: Select
User chooses which issues to fix.
Selection interface:
## Select Issues to Fix
### High Priority ⚠️
- [ ] 1. [Problem] - Impact: [brief statement]
- [ ] 2. [Problem] - Impact: [brief statement]
### Medium Priority ⚙️
- [ ] 3. [Problem] - Impact: [brief statement]
### Low Priority 💡
- [ ] 4. [Problem] - Impact: [brief statement]
**Quick Actions:**
- `Fix all high priority` - Auto-select HIGH issues
- `Fix selected` - Process checked items
- `Details [N]` - View detailed analysis
Interaction:
- User reviews issues
- User checks boxes or uses quick actions
- System confirms selection
- Proceed to execution
Phase 4: Execute
Apply selected fixes to skill files.
Execution rules:
- Backup: Create
.backupbefore changes - Order: Fix HIGH → MEDIUM → LOW
- Show: Display diff for each modification
- Update: Propagate changes to related files
- Log: Record all changes
Fix application:
For each selected issue:
1. Locate exact position
2. Generate fix content
3. Preview change (diff)
4. Apply edit
5. Log change
6. Update related content if needed
Output: Modified skill files + change log
Quality standards: See quality-standards.md
Phase 5: Verify
Test optimization effectiveness with subagents.
Test types:
- Trigger test: Skill discovered correctly
- Understanding test: Workflow interpreted correctly
- Execution test: Can perform real task
- Regression test: Existing function still works
Process:
- Define test scenarios
- Dispatch subagents (parallel)
- Analyze results
- Generate verification report
If verification fails:
- Document failure
- Return to Phase 3 or 4
- Apply fixes
- Re-run verification
- Iterate until pass
Verification guide: See verification-guide.md
Quick Reference
| Phase | Action | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Diagnose | Scan skill | Issue list |
| 2. Report | Format findings | Diagnostic report |
| 3. Select | User chooses | Selected issues |
| 4. Execute | Apply fixes | Modified files |
| 5. Verify | Test changes | Verification report |
Problem Severity
| Level | Definition | Action |
|---|---|---|
| HIGH | Prevents discovery/execution | Must fix |
| MEDIUM | Impacts quality/usability | Should fix |
| LOW | Minor improvement | Nice to fix |
Quality Grading
- A (Excellent): All HIGH pass, < 2 MEDIUM fail
- B (Good): All HIGH pass, < 5 MEDIUM fail
- C (Acceptable): All HIGH pass
- D (Needs Work): Any HIGH fail
- F (Broken): Multiple HIGH fail
Common Issues
Metadata problems:
- Name format wrong → Use lowercase-hyphen
- Description missing "Use when" → Add trigger conditions
- No keywords → Add specific trigger terms
Architecture problems:
- SKILL.md too long → Split to references/
- Deep nesting → Flatten to 1 level
- No progressive disclosure → Add "See [file.md]" links
Text problems:
- Verbose explanations → Remove, assume Claude knows basics
- Time-sensitive info → Move to "Old Patterns" section
- Terminology inconsistent → Standardize terms
Code problems:
- No error handling → Add try/except with helpful messages
- Magic numbers → Add justification comments
- Undeclared dependencies → List in SKILL.md
Anti-Patterns
❌ Auto-fix all issues without user selection ❌ Skip verification phase ❌ Ignore context (domain-specific needs) ❌ Break existing functionality ❌ Over-engineer simple skills
Integration
Dependencies:
superpowers:writing-skills- Skill authoring patternssuperpowers:test-driven-development- Verification methodology
Coordinates with:
skill-creator- Use quality standards when creating skillssuperpowers:verification-before-completion- Verify before deploying
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet. Be the first to review!
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!