CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

engram-memory

ALWAYS ACTIVE — Persistent memory protocol. You MUST save decisions, conventions, bugs, and discoveries to engram proactively. Do NOT wait for the user to ask.

44

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugin/codex/skills/memory/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 well-structured and actionable with concrete tool names, formats, and templates, and it organizes its material into clearly navigable sections. It is somewhat verbose due to repeated imperative emphasis and duplicated fallback text, and it lacks explicit validation checkpoints around the destructive memory-mutation tools it references.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/verification before destructive or upsert operations (e.g. confirm an observation ID with mem_get_observation before mem_update or mem_delete, and verify topic_key reuse before upsert).

Remove duplicated content: the 'engram setup codex' fallback appears both under AVAILABLE TOOLS and at the end of the AFTER COMPACTION section — keep it once.

Tighten the imperative padding ('MANDATORY', 'IMMEDIATELY', 'NOT optional') which does not add information beyond the stated triggers.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and well-sectioned with lists rather than prose, but it repeats the same fallback instruction in two places and over-emphasizes mandatory/imperative language ('MANDATORY', 'IMMEDIATELY', 'This is NOT optional') that pads without adding information Claude does not already infer.

3 / 5

Actionability

It provides concrete, executable guidance: named tools, explicit mem_save field format, a search sequence (mem_context -> mem_search -> mem_get_observation), and a session-summary template with labeled sections; minor gaps include no example tool invocations showing argument structure.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Sequences are present (search steps, compaction recovery, session close), but the cap for destructive/batch operations without validation applies: mem_delete and mem_update are mentioned yet there is no validate-before-delete or verify step, and checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit feedback loops.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-organized into clearly signaled sections covering distinct concerns; with no bundle files present all content is appropriately inline at one level and easy to navigate, with only minor bloat that could be split out.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

32%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 clearly identifies a niche (Engram persistent memory) but reads as an imperative internal protocol rather than a user-facing capability description. It lacks natural trigger terms and an explicit 'Use when...' clause, and its second-person imperative voice reduces specificity per the rubric.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person describing capabilities (e.g. 'Saves and recalls persistent memory across sessions...') rather than imperative instructions ('You MUST save...').

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when the user asks to remember, recall, or persist decisions, conventions, bugs, or discoveries across sessions.'

Replace process-internal jargon ('engram', 'mem_save') in the description with natural user-facing keywords users would actually say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the domain (persistent memory) and concrete actions (save decisions, conventions, bugs, discoveries), but the action list is generic ('save') rather than a set of distinct concrete operations, and it leans on imperative framing over capability description.

2 / 5

Completeness

It states a clear 'what' (persistent memory protocol that saves decisions/conventions/bugs/discoveries) but the 'when' is framed as 'always active' with no concrete trigger phrase a user would say, leaving the use-when guidance implicit; per the rubric a missing explicit 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3 and the always-on framing is weaker still.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Keywords are process-internal ('engram', 'mem_save', 'proactively') rather than natural phrases a user would say when they need this skill; there is no user-facing trigger language like 'remember', 'recall', or 'save this'.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche (Engram persistent memory) with specific tool names that distinguish it from general skills, though the broad 'save decisions/conventions/bugs' scope could overlap marginally with other note-taking or memory skills.

4 / 5

Total

10

/

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
Gentleman-Programming/engram
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.