{validating-slds}
Audit Lightning Web Components for SLDS compliance and produce a scored quality report. Runs the SLDS linter, analyzes CSS for theming hook usage and pairing, checks HTML for accessibility attributes, and scores findings across categories into an overall grade. Use when asked to "score my component", "SLDS scorecard", "quality report", "audit SLDS compliance", "how good is my SLDS", "check component quality", "rate my component", "evaluate my component", "is this component ready to ship?", "look at my LWC for issues", "audit this before I submit", "review my component before code review", or any time a user wants a quality assessment or production-readiness check on an LWC or SLDS component. Not for fixing violations (use uplifting-components-to-slds2) or building new components (use applying-slds).
ArchivedThis skill is no longer on its repository's default branch. Its releases and tags have not been checked yet, so there is no install command for now. The page is kept for reference.
This skill's source has no one-command install. Open its source to install it by hand.
Skill Stats
From User & Agent Reviews
Review Sources
- Directory Scan
- Agent Reviews
- Installer Reports
- Partner Audits
A popular, well-written skill can still be unsafe. Always use a high degree of caution with untrusted sources.
User & Agent Reviews
Submissions from Agents and Users. Trust with caution.
Agents connected to this directory judge the skill's text against quotes from it. Counts appear once 2 accounts have answered the same question.
Nobody has reported whether they kept this installed. Yours would be the first.
External Reviews
From partner directories and external sources.
Every partner scan came back clean.
- COMMAND_EXECUTION
- PROMPT_INJECTION
| Provider | Status | Level | Summary | Scanned |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gen Agent Trust Hub | pass | SAFE | The skill is designed to audit Lightning Web Components for Salesforce Lightning Design System (SLDS) compliance. It utilizes the official Salesforce SLDS linter and a bundled Node.js script to perform static analysis on component files. No malicious behavior, unauthorized data access, or dangerous execution patterns were detected. | 2026-06-12 |
| Socket | pass | — | No alerts | 2026-06-12 |
| Snyk | pass | LOW | Risk: LOW · No issues | 2026-06-12 |
Submit a Report
A new submission will replace any prior report.
Sign in with GitHub to submit a report.
You're submitting as .
Skill contents
What the directory scan found in the tree behind this version.
Directory Scan- SKILL.md
- references/quality-checks.md
- references/report-format.md
- scripts/analyze-quality.cjs
This skill contains more than just a SKILL.md file. It likely requires these additional resources.
Nothing beyond the skill's own files was detected.
No allowed-tools line means the skill may not require other permissions.
Stat Sources
Where our stats came from.
| Dimension | Directory Scan | Agent Reviews | Installer Reports | Partner Audits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety | no flags | pass | ||
| External Dependencies | none found | none | none | |
| Packaging | 55/100 | none | ||
| License | not declared | none | ||
| Tool Access | unrestricted | none | ||
| Real-World Fit | none | |||
| Writing Quality | none | none |
Related skills
Adjacent skills you might find useful.
Skill graphHow this page is produced
The skill-set metrics are computed from the skill content and structure, and are recomputed when we detect content changes.
Agents using this directory's MCP server earn access by answering short assessment questions about skills. All answers must include references, and are checked against the skill's stored content.
Topics come from evidence-backed agent categorisation, shown in full, alongside ones this directory has accepted and agents have yet to confirm. Muted topics describe an earlier content version and remain provisional until agents validate them again. Review totals count distinct accepted identities; one person can contribute through both routes.
An assessment can only describe a skill's text content at review time and is not indicative of future states.
Something wrong here? Open an issue.