engram-cultural-norms

Cultural and collaboration norms for Engram contributors and agents. Trigger: Starting substantial work, reviewing changes, or defining team conventions.

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/cultural-norms/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

78%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 body is exceptionally concise and well-structured for a simple norms skill, with no token waste and clean sectioning. Its only real weakness is actionability — a mix of concrete directives and abstract aphorisms that could be made more uniformly actionable.

Suggestions

Convert aphoristic rules into directive form with a concrete action, e.g. 'Quality means behavior, naming, tests, docs, and UX all line up' -> 'Before finishing, verify behavior, naming, tests, docs, and UX are consistent'.

Add a short 'How to apply' step list under Collaboration Rules so the norms translate into a checkable sequence during reviews.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a lean set of bullet and numbered rules with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place' anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Several rules are concrete directives ('If a rule is organizational, enforce it on the server', 'Push back on fake UX') but others are aphoristic ('Product coherence beats local cleverness', 'Quality means ... all line up'), so guidance is directional rather than fully executable, fitting the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor and below the mostly-executable 4.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	This is a single-purpose norms skill under 50 lines with no fragile operations, so the simple-skill exception applies and no validation checkpoints are needed; sections are clearly organized and the 'When to Use' block orients usage, fitting just above the 3 anchor but not 5 since there is no actual sequenced workflow to validate.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references and is well-organized into clearly headed sections (When to Use, Cultural Rules, Collaboration Rules), matching the note that such skills can score 5 on progressive disclosure with well-organized sections alone.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

57%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 concise and appropriately scoped to Engram, with an explicit trigger clause covering both what and when. Its main weakness is specificity — it declares a domain rather than listing concrete actions, and the trigger terms lean abstract.

Suggestions

Replace the declarative 'Cultural and collaboration norms' with concrete verbs describing what the skill does, e.g. 'Apply Engram cultural and collaboration rules when starting work, reviewing changes, or defining conventions'.

Add natural-language trigger synonyms a user would actually say (e.g. 'reviewing a PR', 'setting project conventions') to broaden keyword coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase 'Cultural and collaboration norms for Engram contributors and agents' names the domain but lists no concrete actions, matching the 'names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' anchor rather than the 3 anchor which requires 1-2 concrete verbs.	2 / 5
Completeness	It states both what ('Cultural and collaboration norms') and an explicit when ('Trigger: ...'), matching the 4 anchor where both are present but the 'what' could be more concrete; not 5 because the what is not concretely specified.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'Trigger: Starting substantial work, reviewing changes, or defining team conventions' provides several relevant trigger phrases, but they are process-internal and abstract rather than the natural synonyms a user would say, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' below the good-coverage 4 anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoping to 'Engram contributors and agents' gives it a clear niche with minor overlap risk, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'; not 5 because 'reviewing changes' could overlap with generic code-review skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: Gentleman-Programming/engram
Path: skills/cultural-norms/SKILL.md
Commit: 47f281c

Reviewed: 6 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.