CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

behavioral-modes

AI operational modes (brainstorm, implement, debug, review, teach, ship, orchestrate).

30

Quality

23%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agent/skills/behavioral-modes/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

22%

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

This skill is essentially a poorly organized table of contents with no substantive content in the body itself. It provides no actionable guidance on what the modes do, when to use them, or how they interact—all critical information is deferred to sub-files without any overview or summary. The flat listing conflates parent modes with their sub-components, creating a confusing hierarchy that undermines navigation.

Suggestions

Add a brief 1-2 sentence description for each mode directly in SKILL.md so Claude understands when to activate each mode without needing to read every sub-file.

Restructure the list to show clear hierarchy—nest sub-components (e.g., critical/improvements/good) under their parent mode (REVIEW) using indentation or sub-lists.

Add a usage workflow: how does Claude decide which mode to use? Include a decision guide or trigger conditions (e.g., 'Use BRAINSTORM when the user asks for ideas or exploration').

Remove the redundant 'Purpose' explanation and replace it with a concise mode-selection table or decision tree that provides immediate actionable value.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is relatively short, but the 'Purpose' section explains what modes are in a way Claude already understands. The main issue is the disorganized listing that adds cognitive overhead without adding value—sub-skills for REVIEW mode (critical/improvements/good) and TEACH mode (what-is-it/how-it-works/example/try-it-yourself) are listed as top-level items rather than nested under their parent modes.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill body contains zero actionable guidance—no instructions on how to activate modes, when to use them, what behaviors each mode entails, or any concrete examples. It is purely a list of links with no executable or instructional content whatsoever.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There is no workflow, sequencing, or process described. The skill doesn't explain how to switch between modes, when to use which mode, or how modes interact. The flat numbered list conflates parent modes with their sub-components, making the hierarchy confusing.

1 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill does reference sub-skill files (one level deep), which is good progressive disclosure in principle. However, the organization is poor—sub-components of specific modes (e.g., critical/improvements/good under REVIEW) are listed at the same level as the modes themselves, making navigation confusing. The numbering is inconsistent (items 5-7 are REVIEW sub-items, 9-12 are TEACH sub-items, but this isn't visually clear). Without bundle files to verify, the references can't be fully validated.

2 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

25%

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 description is too terse and generic to serve as an effective skill selector. It lists mode names without explaining what each mode does or when the skill should be activated, and the trigger terms are so common they would conflict with many other skills. The description needs substantial expansion to be useful in a multi-skill environment.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause that describes the specific scenarios triggering this skill, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to switch between structured workflow modes or asks to brainstorm ideas, debug issues, review code, or ship a project.'

Describe what each operational mode concretely does rather than just listing names — e.g., 'brainstorm mode generates creative ideas freely; implement mode writes production code; debug mode systematically diagnoses errors.'

Add distinguishing context to reduce conflict risk, such as specifying this is for managing Claude's own workflow approach or toggling between structured task modes, not general debugging or code review.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a domain (AI operational modes) and lists specific mode names, but does not describe what concrete actions each mode performs. The parenthetical list names modes but doesn't explain what they do.

2 / 3

Completeness

The description partially answers 'what' (AI operational modes) but provides no 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance. There is no 'Use when...' or equivalent, which per the rubric caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is weak enough to warrant a 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'brainstorm', 'implement', 'debug', 'review', 'teach', and 'ship' are natural words users might say, but they are extremely common and generic — users saying 'debug' likely mean debugging code, not selecting an AI operational mode. The terms lack contextual specificity.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Terms like 'debug', 'review', 'implement', and 'brainstorm' are extremely generic and would overlap with virtually any coding, writing, or problem-solving skill. There is nothing to distinguish this skill's niche from many other potential skills.

1 / 3

Total

6

/

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
Dokhacgiakhoa/antigravity-ide
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.