Run final validation for a Shared Context Engineering plan.
100
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that clearly articulates specific actions (test suite execution, lint/format checks, scaffolding removal, report writing), provides explicit trigger guidance with natural user language, and carves out a distinct niche around plan validation and completion. The description uses proper third-person voice and includes both technical specifics and user-friendly trigger terms.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'executing the full test suite', 'lint and format checks', 'removing temporary scaffolding', and 'writing a structured validation report with command outputs and success-criteria evidence'. Very detailed about what it does. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (runs validation phase with test suite, lint/format, scaffolding removal, writes report) AND when (explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios like verifying implementation, confirming criteria, wrapping up plans). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'verify', 'completed implementation', 'success criteria', 'wrap up a plan', 'finalize a feature or fix', 'sign off', 'closing it out'. Good coverage of natural language variations. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche as the 'final validation phase' skill with distinct triggers around plan completion and sign-off. The specific mention of writing to 'context/plans/{plan_name}.md' and focus on 'success-criteria evidence' makes it unlikely to conflict with general testing or linting skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a high-quality skill that provides clear, actionable guidance for plan validation. It efficiently covers the complete workflow from running checks to handling failures to writing the final report, with concrete examples throughout. The structure is logical and the content respects Claude's intelligence while providing the specific details needed for execution.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, with no unnecessary explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Every section serves a clear purpose and the language is direct without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance with real command examples (pytest, npm test, eslint --fix, ruff --fix), specific file paths to check, and a complete example report entry that's copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear numbered checklist with explicit validation steps, includes feedback loops for failures (fix -> re-run -> update report), and distinguishes between fixable vs non-trivial failures with specific escalation guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections (When to use, Validation checklist, If checks fail, Validation report). Content is appropriately sized for a single file with no need for external references, and the example report is properly nested under its section. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents