CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

arn-spark-stress-prfaq

This skill should be used when the user says "prfaq", "pr faq", "pr/faq", "press release stress test", "stress prfaq", "amazon pr faq method", "test the pitch with a pr/faq", "validate concept through pr/faq", "critique press release", "pr faq stress test", "will this marketing story hold up", or wants to stress-test a product concept by drafting a compelling press release and FAQ, then adversarially critiquing it to find where the concept cracks under scrutiny. Produces a PR/FAQ report with the full draft, adversarial questions, crack point analysis, and recommended concept updates.

72

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

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-crafted, highly actionable skill that clearly defines a multi-step workflow with proper validation checkpoints, error handling, and feedback loops. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity — the rationale for separate invocations is repeated in multiple places, and some sections could be more concise. The progressive disclosure is reasonable with references to external templates, though the main file carries substantial inline detail that could be offloaded.

Suggestions

Consolidate the explanation of why separate invocations matter into a single location (e.g., the Constraints section) and reference it briefly elsewhere, rather than repeating it in the intro, Step 4, and Error Handling.

Consider moving the detailed quality check criteria and retry prompt templates into a reference file to reduce the length of the main SKILL.md.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is fairly detailed and well-structured, but includes some unnecessary verbosity — e.g., explaining why separate invocations matter multiple times (in the intro, Step 4, Constraints, and Error Handling), and the data availability table with fallback cascade is somewhat over-explained. Some sections could be tightened without losing clarity.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides highly concrete, executable guidance: exact file paths to read, specific agent invocation parameters with structured context blocks, quality check criteria with retry instructions, precise output format for the summary, and a standardized schema for recommendations. Every step tells Claude exactly what to do.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is clearly sequenced (Steps 1-6) with explicit validation checkpoints after both the draft phase (quality check with retry logic) and critique phase (quality check with retry logic). Error handling covers context leaks, generic outputs, and agent failures with specific recovery paths. The feedback loops (retry with more specific context, retry with sharper adversarial instruction) are well-defined.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references external files (prfaq-workflow.md, prfaq-report-template.md) which is good progressive disclosure, but no bundle files were provided to verify these exist. The SKILL.md itself is quite long (~180 lines of substantive content) and some material like the detailed quality check criteria and retry prompts could potentially be moved to reference files. The structure within the file is well-organized with clear headers.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

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 description that clearly defines a specific niche (PR/FAQ stress-testing), provides extensive natural trigger terms, and explicitly states both what the skill does and when to use it. The only minor concern is that the long list of trigger phrases makes it somewhat verbose, but this is offset by the clarity and completeness of the description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: drafting a compelling press release and FAQ, adversarially critiquing it, finding crack points, and producing a report with full draft, adversarial questions, crack point analysis, and recommended concept updates.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (stress-test a product concept by drafting a PR/FAQ then adversarially critiquing it, producing a report with draft, adversarial questions, crack point analysis, and recommendations) and 'when' (explicit trigger phrases and a general 'when the user wants to stress-test a product concept' clause).

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including many variations: 'prfaq', 'pr faq', 'pr/faq', 'press release stress test', 'stress prfaq', 'amazon pr faq method', 'critique press release', 'will this marketing story hold up', and more. These cover how users would naturally phrase such requests.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive niche — the PR/FAQ stress-testing method is a very specific framework (Amazon-style), and the extensive list of trigger terms are unique to this domain. Unlikely to conflict with generic writing, marketing, or document skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

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.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
AppsVortex/arness
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.