team-scheduling

Team event types, round-robin assignment, collective bookings, host weights, and no-show calibration.

Quality

76%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./packages/scheduling/docs/skills/team-scheduling/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

87%

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

The body is concise, concrete, and well-structured with executable commands and clear field definitions. The main gap is the absence of validation/verification checkpoints for host-assignment changes, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verify step for mutating operations, e.g. after set-event-type-hosts confirm the round-robin winner resolves as expected via a host-assignment check.

Document a tie-break verification or dry-run path for round-robin so destructive routing changes can be validated before applying.

Consider a short post-action checklist for batch host updates (e.g. OOO bulk inserts) to confirm exclusion/redirect behavior took effect.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it defines scheduling types, strategies, host fields, and overrides with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every section earns its tokens.	3 / 3
Actionability	Concrete and copy-ready throughout: exact CLI commands ('create-event-type --schedulingType round-robin'), table row shapes ('{userEmail, isFixed, weight, priority, scheduleId?}'), and a common-tasks table mapping real user requests to specific actions.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are implied via the common-tasks table, but there is no explicit validation/verification step for operations that mutate host assignment (a destructive-ish, state-changing workflow), so the missing feedback loop caps workflow clarity at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a sub-50-line skill with no bundle files and no need for external references, the content is well-organized into clear sections — meeting the simple-skill allowance for a top progressive_disclosure score.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

65%

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 is specific and well-scoped to a distinct team-scheduling domain, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, leaving the activation context only implicit. Adding a usage clause would lift completeness and trigger-term coverage.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when configuring team event types, rotating hosts across bookings, or balancing host assignment load.'

Include natural user-facing phrases such as 'rotate hosts', 'assign team members', or 'team scheduling' to broaden trigger coverage.

Keep the third-person voice (it already does) while extending the description with the when-context to fully answer both what and when.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions/capabilities — 'round-robin assignment', 'collective bookings', 'host weights', and 'no-show calibration' — each a specific team-scheduling feature rather than vague language.	3 / 3
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (the enumerated capabilities) but has no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so the 'when should Claude use it' half is missing and caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'team event types', 'round-robin', 'collective bookings' are domain-relevant but lean technical; common user-facing variations ('team scheduling', 'rotate hosts', 'assign team members') are only partially covered.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is clearly scoped to team-level scheduling primitives (round-robin/collective/host weights/no-show), which is distinct from generic single-host booking and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: BuilderIO/agent-native
Path: packages/scheduling/docs/skills/team-scheduling/SKILL.md
Commit: e9a2f0e

Reviewed: 4 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.