arn-spark-concept-review
This skill should be used when the user says "concept review", "review concept", "update product concept", "synthesize stress tests", "stress test review", "apply stress test findings", "review stress test results", "concept update", "merge stress test recommendations", or wants to synthesize findings from completed stress tests into a reviewed and updated product concept document. Scans for stress test reports, consolidates recommendations, resolves conflicts using product pillars, presents the full changeset for user approval, and produces an updated product-concept.md alongside a concept-review-report.md.
84
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
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 a strong skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides extensive trigger phrases covering natural user language, clearly describes concrete actions and outputs, and occupies a very distinct niche. The only minor weakness is that the description is somewhat front-loaded with trigger terms, making it slightly harder to parse, but this doesn't materially impact its effectiveness for skill selection.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: scans for stress test reports, consolidates recommendations, resolves conflicts using product pillars, presents changeset for approval, and produces updated product-concept.md alongside concept-review-report.md. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (scans stress test reports, consolidates recommendations, resolves conflicts, presents changeset, produces updated documents) and 'when' (explicit trigger phrases listed at the beginning with 'This skill should be used when...'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Provides extensive natural trigger phrases users would say: 'concept review', 'review concept', 'update product concept', 'synthesize stress tests', 'stress test review', 'apply stress test findings', 'review stress test results', 'concept update', 'merge stress test recommendations'. These cover many natural variations. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche combining stress test synthesis with product concept document updates. The specific domain (stress test reports → product concept review) and output artifacts (product-concept.md, concept-review-report.md) make it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is exceptionally thorough and actionable with a well-structured multi-step workflow, explicit validation gates, and comprehensive error handling. However, it is severely over-verbose — the content could likely be cut by 40-50% without losing any actionable information. Many sections repeat context, over-explain interaction patterns, and include detail that Claude could infer from shorter instructions.
Suggestions
Reduce verbosity by condensing the user approval flow patterns — the three review modes (accept all, by section, individually) could be a compact decision tree rather than fully expanded prose for each path.
Move the detailed error handling table and agent invocation format blocks into separate reference files, keeping only a brief summary in the main SKILL.md.
Eliminate redundancy between Prerequisites and Error Handling sections — the same conditions (no reports, missing concept, missing pillars) are described in both places with slightly different wording.
Condense the stress test report detection section — the scan results format, zero-reports fallback, and available skills list could be a compact template rather than fully spelled out prose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. Extensively explains processes Claude could infer, repeats information across sections (error handling restates prerequisites), and includes excessive detail on user interaction flows that could be condensed significantly. The skill over-specifies conversational patterns and agent invocation formats that could be templated. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Highly actionable with specific file paths, exact agent invocation formats with structured input blocks, precise table parsing instructions, concrete AskUserQuestion prompts with numbered options, and explicit file operations (rename, write). Every step has clear, executable instructions. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent 8-step workflow with clear sequencing, explicit validation checkpoints (mandatory user approval gate in Step 5), error recovery paths (retry strategist, abort options), and feedback loops (reject → reason collection, modify → user input). The prerequisite checks prevent proceeding without required data. Destructive operations (file rename/overwrite) have explicit safeguards. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References external files (conflict-resolution-protocol.md, review-report-template.md, product-concept-template.md) which is good progressive disclosure, but the SKILL.md itself is monolithic with enormous inline detail that could be split into reference files. The agent invocation formats, detailed user interaction flows, and error handling could be separate references. No bundle files were provided to verify reference accuracy. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- AppsVortex/arness
- Commit
1fe948f
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.