Use when migrating, restructuring, publishing, or auditing an existing Claude skill into a Tessl tile; converting flat .md files or SKILL.md bundles; fixing Tessl Quality, Impact, Uplift, frontmatter, metadata, tile.json summary, README, markdown reference links, registry-vs-local Quality gaps, artifact anchors, auto-eval wait discipline, or pushing tile scores from 88-99% to 100%.
100
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.11xAverage score across 4 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
A teammate migrated a release-note authoring skill into a Tessl tile. The team has already made several wording and README passes, and the latest version looks healthy in the usual summary commands. The registry total score is still below 100%, and the team is debating three possible explanations: a security advisory, missing manual verification, or another round of wording polish.
The team needs a concrete triage memo before making another publish. They also want the eval suite strengthened so this exact failure mode is caught in future migrations without making the scenario so obvious that a baseline agent gets it for free.
You have these inputs:
inputs/registry-search.json - registry search results for the target tile
plus nearby comparison tilesinputs/tile-info.txt - the current tile summary outputinputs/teammate-notes.md - hypotheses and local eval inventoryUse the Tessl migration skill guidance to diagnose the real blocker, reject the wrong fixes, and design a stronger eval scenario that would catch this issue without leaking the answer in the task prompt.
Write two files:
score-triage.md
scenario-repair-plan.md