CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

openspec-propose

Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.

65

Quality

78%

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 ./skills/openspec-propose/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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 content is a highly actionable, well-sequenced workflow with concrete commands and strong validation checkpoints. Its only notable weakness is mild verbosity from restating the planning boundary and --store flag guidance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept padding), but the planning-boundary guardrail is restated verbatim at the top and again under Guardrails, and the --store flag instructions repeat across steps, so it could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready, fully executable commands (e.g. `openspec new change "<name>"`, `openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json`) plus concrete JSON fields to parse, covering the common cases comprehensively.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced Steps 1-7 workflow with explicit validation checkpoints (rerun `openspec status`, verify each artifact file exists before proceeding, context-failure stops) and feedback loops for error recovery, satisfying the 5-anchor even though it is a batch operation.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the skill is a cohesive self-contained workflow well-organized into labeled sections (Steps, Output, Artifact Creation Guidelines, Guardrails); it is appropriately single-file, though at ~150 lines some scaffold-detail could optionally be split out.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

76%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 is strong and complete, explicitly stating both the capability and a 'Use when...' trigger with concrete deliverables. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage, which relies on a single natural phrasing rather than a richer set of synonyms.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms users might say, e.g. 'plan a feature', 'spec out a change', or 'draft a proposal'.

Name 'openspec' or 'spec-driven' explicitly to sharpen distinctiveness and reduce overlap with generic planning skills.

Consider naming the individual generation actions (generate, scaffold, draft) rather than only the output artifacts.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step') and lists several concrete deliverables ('a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks'), but stops short of naming each generation action explicitly, leaving a minor gap versus the comprehensive 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers what ('Propose a new change with all artifacts... design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation') and when ('Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build') with a concrete trigger clause, matching the 5-anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes a natural phrase ('when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build') but lacks common synonyms or variations a user might say (e.g., 'spec out', 'plan a feature', 'draft a change'), so coverage is relevant but incomplete.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The spec-driven artifact bundle (proposal, design, specs, tasks) is a fairly distinct niche, though the description does not name 'openspec' or 'spec-driven', leaving minor overlap risk with generic planning/proposal skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Fission-AI/OpenSpec
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.