CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

team-ui

Orchestrate the UI team through the full UX pipeline: from UX spec authoring through visual design, implementation, review, and polish. Integrates with /ux-design, /ux-review, and studio UX templates.

53

Quality

61%

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 ./.claude/skills/team-ui/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

62%

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

The body is a well-sequenced orchestration workflow with strong validation gates and error-recovery feedback loops, but it carries redundancy across sections, leaves per-agent prompt composition to the model, and keeps all detail inline with no progressive disclosure to reference files.

Suggestions

De-duplicate the team composition: present each role once and have 'How to Delegate' reference it rather than restating responsibilities, and consolidate the repeated interaction-patterns.md update rule into a single stated-once instruction.

Consider splitting the per-phase agent responsibility lists and the Error Recovery Protocol into a reference file (e.g., references/agent-roles.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview with one-level-deep pointers.

Provide literal, copy-paste-ready subagent prompt skeletons (with the 'full context' slots marked) so dispatch is unambiguous rather than requiring the orchestrator to assemble prompts from responsibility lists.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

It assumes Claude's competence with no basic-concept padding, but duplicates the team composition across 'Team Composition' and 'How to Delegate' and restates the interaction-patterns.md update rule in Phases 1a, 3, and 5, so it is mostly efficient but could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete on structure with literal file paths, subagent_types, templates, AskUserQuestion option sets, and verdict strings, but each agent invocation must be synthesized from a responsibility list rather than dispatched via a copy-paste-ready prompt, leaving some assembly work.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear Phase 0–5 sequence carries explicit gates ('Do not proceed to Phase 2 until the verdict is APPROVED'), validation checkpoints (review verdicts, all three review streams must report), and feedback loops (NEEDS REVISION re-run plus the Error Recovery Protocol), matching the anchor for explicit validation and error recovery.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized and external templates/skills are referenced one level deep, but no bundle files exist and all orchestration detail is inline in a single ~180-line file, so content that could be split (detailed agent responsibilities, error recovery, quick reference) remains inline.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

60%

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 effectively communicates a specific multi-action capability in third-person imperative voice, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and natural trigger-term coverage, leaving the when-to-use and distinctiveness dimensions underdeveloped.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when building a new UI screen, HUD, or flow end-to-end, or when the user mentions UI/UX, interface design, or HUD').

Add common user-facing variations like 'interface', 'HUD', and 'screen design' alongside 'UI'/'UX' to improve trigger-term coverage.

Sharpen distinctiveness by contrasting the orchestrator role against /ux-design and /quick-design (e.g., 'Use for the full pipeline; use /ux-design for a single spec or /quick-design for small changes').

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "UX spec authoring through visual design, implementation, review, and polish" — matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions; bare-verb form mirrors the rubric's good examples with no first/second-person pronoun, so no voice penalty.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly states what the skill does, but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so the 'when' is only implied; per the judging guideline a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant natural keywords ("UI", "UX", "visual design", "polish") but offers no explicit trigger enumeration and misses common variations a user might say ("interface", "HUD", "screen design"), landing at the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The full-pipeline orchestrator niche is fairly specific and signals integration with /ux-design and /ux-review, but it overlaps with those skills plus /quick-design and lacks distinct triggers that would prevent mis-selection, matching the 'somewhat specific but could overlap' anchor.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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
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.