CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

mvp-followup

Use when asking what to do next after a feature pass while avoiding bloat and checking for unfinished MVP work.

64

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/mvp-followup/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A lean, well-structured instruction skill: concrete checklists, a real command, and a clear output contract, with zero padding. The only soft spot is a slightly under-specified safety condition ('where safe') and the absence of a post-execution re-check step.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every section earns its place with no concept explanations or padding; e.g., "Prefer non-mutating checks when the worktree has unrelated dirty files" captures non-obvious project knowledge in minimal tokens. It cleanly matches the 'lean and efficient, every token earns its place' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: an ordered checklist ("failing or skipped verification → unreviewed real-data pilot results → pending review/proposals/approval queues"), a real command (`pnpm prep`), and a concrete output shape (Do now / Defer / Blocker). Not 5 because "run the closeout work in parallel where safe" leaves 'where safe' undefined — a minor gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced with an explicit priority order and a decision gate ("If the user says 'do it', run the closeout work"). Not 5 because there is no explicit validate/re-check loop after executing the work, though nothing here is destructive or batch so no cap applies.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no external references needed, and its sections (Rule / Workflow / Output Shape / Verification Bias / Related Skills) are well-organized and easy to navigate — per the simple-skill guideline this earns a 5. The Related Skills entries point to other skills, not dangling bundle files.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

70%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A well-formed description with an explicit 'Use when' trigger and natural, distinctive keywords. Its main weakness is that the 'what' side is stated abstractly — the concrete closeout actions that define the skill appear only in the body, leaving the description's capability statement under-specified.

Suggestions

Name 2-3 concrete closeout actions in the description itself (e.g., "re-run skipped verification, reconcile docs with behavior, clear pending review queues") to raise specificity.

Move a compact version of the body's core verb ("recommend or execute only closeout work that makes the MVP shippable") into the description so the 'what' is as strong as the 'when'.

Add a common trigger variation such as "what's left to finish" or "wrap up" to broaden natural keyword coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"checking for unfinished MVP work" and "avoiding bloat" name the domain plus 1-2 actions, but the actions are abstract — no concrete closeout actions (run skipped tests, reconcile docs, clear review queues) are stated in the description itself. It matches the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor, sitting below 4 (coverage is thin) and above 2 (domain and actions are identifiable).

3 / 5

Completeness

Both what ("checking for unfinished MVP work", "avoiding bloat") and when ("Use when asking what to do next after a feature pass") are explicitly present. Not 5 because the 'what' is thin — the concrete verbs ("recommend or execute only closeout work") live in the body rather than the description.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"asking what to do next", "after a feature pass", and "MVP" are natural user phrasings with good coverage. Not 5 because common variations like "wrap up", "what's left", or "finish the feature" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"after a feature pass" plus "MVP" carves a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk. Minor overlap with general qa/ship-style follow-up skills keeps it below the 'clear niche, minimal conflict' 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
BuilderIO/agent-native
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.