experiments/eval-setup
Generate eval scenarios from repo commits, configure multi-agent runs, execute baseline + with-context evals, and compare results — the full setup pipeline before improvement begins
79
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
67%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description excels at specificity and distinctiveness, clearly articulating a unique evaluation pipeline workflow. However, it lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and could benefit from more natural user-facing keywords. The technical terminology may not match how users naturally request this functionality.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when setting up evaluation pipelines, comparing agent performance, or generating test scenarios from git history'
Include more natural keyword variations users might say: 'evaluation', 'testing', 'benchmark', 'compare agents', 'performance comparison'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Generate eval scenarios from repo commits', 'configure multi-agent runs', 'execute baseline + with-context evals', and 'compare results'. These are distinct, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what does this do' with the list of actions, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The phrase 'the full setup pipeline' hints at when but doesn't provide explicit triggers. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant technical terms like 'eval scenarios', 'repo commits', 'multi-agent runs', 'baseline', but these are fairly specialized. Missing common variations users might say like 'evaluation', 'testing', 'benchmark', or 'assessment'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly specific niche combining eval generation, multi-agent configuration, and comparison workflows. The combination of 'repo commits' + 'multi-agent runs' + 'baseline + with-context evals' creates a distinct fingerprint unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, highly actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and concrete executable commands. The main weakness is moderate verbosity in user-facing prompts and dialogue templates that could be condensed. The skill effectively guides Claude through a complex multi-phase process with appropriate validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Condense user-facing dialogue blocks - Claude can generate appropriate prompts without verbatim scripts
Move the agent/model comparison table to a separate reference file and link to it
Remove explanatory phrases like 'This sends the request to Tessl's servers' that describe obvious behavior
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary verbosity in user-facing prompts and explanations. Phrases like 'This sends the request to Tessl's servers' and extensive quoted dialogue blocks add tokens without adding value for Claude. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash commands throughout with specific flags, options, and expected outputs. Commands are copy-paste ready with clear placeholders for user-specific values. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-phase workflow with clear sequencing (7 phases), explicit polling/validation steps (check status, verify downloads), and error recovery guidance (retry failed evals). Each phase has numbered sub-steps with clear checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-structured with clear phases and sections, but the entire workflow is in one monolithic file. The companion skill reference is good, but detailed agent/model tables and extensive user dialogue templates could be split into separate reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i experiments/eval-setup@0.3.0Reviewed
Table of Contents