An exceptionally actionable, well-sequenced workflow skill whose validation discipline and concrete templates are exemplary. Its weaknesses are length and embedded design-rationale commentary that inflate token cost, and inline content (the story template, tier variants) that a reference file would offload.

Suggestions

Remove or relocate the reflective meta-commentary blocks ("The zero-epic path is load-bearing...", "This field is load-bearing and had no rule, so it was improvised") — they explain why the rule exists, not what to do.

Move the full story template and the per-tier variant mappings into a references/ file, keeping SKILL.md as the workflow overview.

Consolidate triplicated tier rules into a single table (one row per tier) instead of restating each rule three times inline.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Most of the body is dense, load-bearing configuration-dependent rules, but it carries real padding: reflective meta-commentary ("The zero-epic path is load-bearing... the shape to watch for", "This field is load-bearing and had no rule, so it was improvised") is design rationale rather than instruction, and tier rules are often stated three overlapping ways. More than minor trimmable instances, so it sits below 4 but well above severely verbose.	3 / 5
Actionability	Fully executable throughout: exact Grep patterns with flags, exact stop-message strings, a complete copy-paste story template, exact AskUserQuestion prompts and option sets, and explicit fallback ladders ("Last Verified, else Date, else unversioned"). Common cases are concretely covered.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1–7 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (tier-gated ADR existence stops, the zero-epic glob guard, the QL-STORY-READY gate with per-verdict handling) and genuine feedback loops (re-request specs after GAPS/INADEQUATE revision), with file writes gated behind an approval ask.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist; the body appropriately defers to one-level-deep, clearly signaled external docs (director-gates per-gate files with "do not read it in the parent session", config-resolution, workflow-modes, automation-modes) with sectioned structure throughout. The ~100-line inline story template and repeated tier branches belong in reference files, keeping it below 5.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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 tight, domain-specific description that names its pipeline position and concrete actions with distinct vocabulary. Its main weakness is a trigger clause that states sequence ("After /create-epics") rather than user intent, and action coverage that omits the write/QA halves of the skill.

Suggestions

Add an intent-based trigger clause, e.g. "Use when an epic exists and needs to be broken into implementable stories" alongside the pipeline cue.

Mention the primary outputs to round out coverage, e.g. "writes story files with acceptance criteria and QA test specs".

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Break one epic into implementable stories embedding TR-ID, ADR guidance, acceptance criteria. Reads the control manifest" names several specific concrete actions. Coverage has gaps — writing story files, QA test specs, and the review/approval loop are absent — so it is not comprehensive.	4 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (decompose an epic into stories with embedded traceability) and "After /create-epics" is explicit trigger guidance, so the missing-when cap does not apply. The "when" is pipeline position rather than user-intent triggers, so it could be more explicit and specific.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"epic", "stories", "break ... into stories", "ADR", "control manifest", and "/create-epics" give good keyword coverage in the workflow's natural vocabulary. A few natural terms/synonyms (e.g. "user stories", "decompose", "tasks") are missing, keeping it below 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	A clear niche — story decomposition from epics, positioned between "/create-epics" and "/dev-story" — with distinct domain vocabulary (TR-ID, ADR, control manifest) and minimal conflict risk.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios
Path: .claude/skills/create-stories/SKILL.md
Commit: b21fa0f

Reviewed: 3 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.