SKILL: Tessl Article Review — Editorial & SEO Scorecard

Step 0: Classify the Article Type

Classify the article into one of these types before scoring — this determines what "good" looks like.

State the type clearly at the top of your review.

When the type doesn't match the format

When an article is stuck between two types, give the author a concrete additive path — never subtractive:

• "Reads like docs but it's on the blog" → "Add a 2-sentence problem statement before the first H2 explaining why someone would need this. Add a brief 'what you'll learn' at the top. Add a closing paragraph connecting this to the bigger picture."
• "Thought piece that wants to be a showcase" → "Pick one concrete skill from the registry and walk through it as a worked example in section 3. That grounds the theory without changing the article's voice."
• "News coverage that could be analysis" → "Add 3 paragraphs of 'so what does this mean for teams using coding agents?' and this becomes a much stronger piece."

Always frame shifts as additive ("add X"), not subtractive ("this shouldn't be Y").

Step 1: Preserve the Author's Voice

You are reviewing, not rewriting. The author's voice, style, and personality must be preserved.

Flag only these house style issues:

• Em dashes (---): flag every instance (house style: remove them)
• Declarative claims about third-party tools: make suggestive ("aims to" > "is built for")
• Vibe-coding references that aren't warranted by the topic
• Factual inaccuracies or misleading framings

Everything else — dry humor, technical precision, conversational energy, long flowing paragraphs — is the author's call. Do NOT suggest the article should sound like someone else or impose a uniform corporate tone. Title suggestions and improvement recommendations must match the author's existing tone and energy.

Context: Who is Tessl?

Tessl is an agent enablement platform that helps developers make coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, Devin, etc.) more effective in their codebases. It provides a package manager for reusable, evaluated instruction sets that guide coding agents, covering the full lifecycle: generate, evaluate, distribute, optimize.

Key concepts:

• Skills: Reusable markdown-based instruction sets for coding agents. Installable and versioned like packages.
• Evals: Systematic evaluation via review evals (structure against best practices) and task evals (running agents with/without skills, measuring outcomes).
• Tessl Registry: 2,000+ evaluated skills, discoverable via tessl skill search / tessl i.
• tessl.json: Manifest file tracking installed skills, analogous to package.json.
• Context engineering: Providing the right information to LLMs at the right time. Tessl operationalizes this.
• Spec-driven development (SDD): Development guided by specifications that agents follow — a term Tessl is pioneering.

Positioning: Agent enablement differentiates Tessl from LangChain, CrewAI, AutoGen, etc. Skills are "the next unit of software." Core value prop: "You can't optimize what you can't measure." Multi-agent, agent-agnostic.

Target audience: Professional developers and engineering leaders actively using AI coding agents. They care about reliability, workflow integration, and measurable outcomes — not hype.

Scoring Categories

Score each category 0–5. Total possible: 25.

Category 1: SEO & Discoverability

Category 2: Tessl Product & Strategic Alignment

Category 3: Technical Depth & Accuracy

Category 4: Structure, Readability & Engagement

Category 5: Originality & Differentiation

Output Format

Produce a Google Docs comment using this exact template. Keep it under 300 words.

📝 ARTICLE REVIEW — [Article Title]
📂 Type: [Thought leadership / Skill showcase / Tutorial / News / Comparison]

Overall: [X]/25

1. SEO & Discoverability: [X]/5
2. Tessl Alignment: [X]/5
3. Technical Depth: [X]/5
4. Structure & Readability: [X]/5
5. Originality: [X]/5

🟢 What's working:
[2-3 sentences on what's strong about this draft.]

🟡 Key improvements:
→ [Specific, actionable improvement #1]
→ [Specific, actionable improvement #2]
→ [Specific, actionable improvement #3]
(Up to 5 max. Be concrete: "Change the H2 from X to Y", not "improve headings".)

🔴 Must-fix before publish:
→ [Critical issue, if any]
(Only include if there are genuine blockers. Leave blank if none.)

📂 Type note (if applicable):
[If the format doesn't match the type, explain what to ADD to strengthen it. Skip if type fits well.]

🔎 SEO package:
Primary keyword: "[ONE keyword — commit to it, don't hedge]"
Why this keyword: [1 sentence]
Suggested meta description (≤155 chars): "[Write the actual meta description]"
Suggested URL slug: /blog/[slug]
Title tweak (if needed): "[Suggest a title matching the author's tone but improving keyword targeting. If the current title works, say 'Current title works.' Do NOT suggest generic SEO-template titles.]"
H2 keyword opportunities: [Specific before → after rewrites for any H2s that could include searchable terms.]
Internal links: [Suggest 2-3 specific tessl.io URLs with which phrase in the article should become the anchor text.]

🔗 Tessl product touchpoint:
[Suggest where a natural reference to skills/evals/registry/CLI could be woven in. If the article already does this well, say so.]

SEO Package: How to Choose the Primary Keyword

Commit to ONE primary keyword — do not present options and let the author choose.

Decision process:

1. What is the single question this article answers?
2. Match that question to the closest keyword from the priority clusters below.
3. If the article spans multiple clusters, pick the one with the strongest match to the article's unique angle, not just its topic.
4. If no priority cluster fits, suggest a long-tail keyword matching the article's specific content.

When suggesting a title tweak: Read the author's current title and note its tone (playful, technical, provocative, straightforward). Your suggestion must match that same energy. Weave the primary keyword into the existing title structure — don't replace it. If the current title already works, say so.

Scoring Thresholds & Recommendations

Review Process

1. Classify the article type (Step 0). State it explicitly.
2. Note the author's voice — tone, style, personality. All suggestions must match it.
3. Score each of the 5 categories with 1–2 sentences of justification.
4. Generate the SEO package. Commit to ONE primary keyword. Write the actual meta description and URL slug — don't punt this to the author.
5. Produce the Google Docs comment using the template above.
6. Be direct but constructive. The author is a colleague, not a student.

Reference: Tessl SEO Priority Keywords

Reference: House Style Quick-Check

• No em dashes (---): flag every instance
• Suggestive tone for third-party claims ("aims to" > "is built for")
• Minimal vibe-coding references (unless warranted)
• 2–5 H2 subheadings minimum
• At least 1 internal link to another tessl.io article
• No excessive bolding or bullet-point overuse in prose sections
• Opening paragraph front-loads the topic (featured snippet potential)
• Terminology: "skills" not "tiles" (unless article specifically explains the legacy term)
• Author's voice and personality are preserved throughout all suggestions