ask-questions-if-underspecified

Clarify requirements before implementing. Do not use automatically, only when invoked explicitly.

1.56x

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

86%

1.56x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-mikeastock/skills/ask-questions-if-underspecified/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

93%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.

The skill body is concise, highly actionable, and well-structured with concrete templates and a clear sequenced workflow. The only minor gap is lighter error-recovery feedback loops, which are less critical for a conversational clarification skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; every section delivers actionable guidance.	5 / 5
Actionability	It provides concrete, copy-paste-ready question templates, a numbered multiple-choice example block with reply formats, and specific formatting rules — fully actionable for an instruction-only skill.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence with an explicit pause checkpoint ("Until must-have answers arrive") and a confirm-and-proceed loop; the validate→fix→retry feedback loop is lighter than anchor 5 since this is conversational rather than a fragile file operation.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A single well-sectioned SKILL.md with no bundle files, clear headers, and no nested references; structure is easy to navigate and content is appropriately contained in one file.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description communicates the skill's purpose and invocation constraint clearly in third person, but its trigger guidance is negative rather than positive and its trigger-term coverage is thin. Adding a positive "Use when..." clause with natural user phrases would raise completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Add a positive "Use when..." trigger clause naming concrete user signals (e.g., "Use when a request is ambiguous, underspecified, or lacks acceptance criteria").

Broaden natural trigger terms to include synonyms users say, such as "underspecified", "ambiguous", or "ask clarifying questions".

Optionally name the core actions the skill performs (decide if underspecified, ask must-have questions, confirm interpretation) to lift specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Clarify requirements before implementing" names the domain and one concrete action (clarifying) but lists no broader enumeration of capabilities, matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor.	3 / 5
Completeness	It states a clear "what" but the "when" is framed negatively ("Do not use automatically, only when invoked explicitly") rather than as a positive trigger clause, which caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Clarify requirements" is a relevant natural phrase but the description lacks synonyms or common variations (e.g., underspecified, ambiguous, ask questions) users would actually say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The explicit "only when invoked explicitly" gating gives it a clear niche with minimal accidental triggering, though it remains a broad behavioral skill with minor overlap risk.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust
Path: tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-mikeastock/skills/ask-questions-if-underspecified/SKILL.md
Commit: 6453c0b

Reviewed: about 10 hours 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.