CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

engram-memory-protocol

Persistent memory discipline for Engram contributors. Trigger: Decisions, bugfixes, discoveries, preferences, or session closure.

Quality

76%

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/memory-protocol/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 an exemplar of token-efficient instruction writing: terse, dense, and assuming intelligence, with concrete tool-level guidance (named mem_* tools, ordering, dedup-by-ID rules) and explicit guard conditions for risky write operations. Remaining gaps are minor: no invocation argument examples, recovery steps phrased as prohibitions, and a dangling DOCS.md pointer outside the bundle.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and lean with zero padding — no concept explanations Claude already knows — and trusts the reader with compressed maxims like "A failed read is not evidence of absence" and "snippets are not identity evidence". Every token earns its place, matching 'Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence'.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: exact tools and order ("mem_context, then mem_search with distinctive keywords, then mem_get_observation"), "mem_update by ID: keep topic_key", and mem_session_summary's field list (Goal, Instructions, Discoveries, Accomplished, Next Steps, Relevant Files). Not 5 because no invocation arguments or signatures are shown, so it is not fully copy-paste ready.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Recall, write (search → read candidates in full → update vs. save), and session-close flows are clearly sequenced with guard checkpoints ("If already covered, write nothing", "On ambiguous identity or failed lookup, do not overwrite"). Not 5 because error-recovery loops (e.g., what to do after a failed write beyond 'do not blindly repeat') are stated as prohibitions rather than explicit validate-fix-retry steps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

At ~40 lines with well-organized sections (When to Use, Selective Memory, Session Close Rules, Delivery Guarantee) and no need for external references, structure is good. Not 5 because "Canonical prose lives in DOCS.md" points to a file absent from the skill's bundle (no references/ directory), and a stray '---' rule awkwardly severs the final Delivery Guarantee section.

4 / 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 short, correctly voiced, and scoped to a niche (Engram contributors) with an explicit trigger clause, so it answers both what and when. Its main weakness is specificity: it states a discipline rather than any concrete actions, and its trigger keywords lack the natural synonyms a user would actually say.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 concrete actions to the description, e.g. 'Records decisions with rationale, non-obvious root causes, and session summaries to persistent memory via mem_save/mem_update/mem_search' — this would lift specificity from anchor 2 to 4.

Expand trigger terms with natural user phrasings and synonyms: 'remember this', 'recall what we decided', 'save this preference', 'wrap up / close the session', alongside the existing 'Decisions, bugfixes, discoveries, preferences, or session closure'.

State what persistence means operationally (searchable observations with topic keys per project) so the 'what' is concrete rather than the abstract 'memory discipline'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Persistent memory discipline for Engram contributors" names the domain but enumerates no concrete actions (no save/search/update/persist verbs). This matches the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' — not 3, since no specific capability is listed, and not 1, since the domain is explicitly scoped.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: a what ("Persistent memory discipline for Engram contributors") and an explicit when ("Trigger: Decisions, bugfixes, discoveries, preferences, or session closure"), matching 'Has both what and when; when could be more explicit or specific'. Not 5 because the what states no concrete capabilities, and the trigger categories are unelaborated.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Trigger: Decisions, bugfixes, discoveries, preferences, or session closure" provides relevant keywords, but common natural phrasings users would say ("remember this", "recall", "save that", "forget") and their synonyms are missing. Fits 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than 4's 'Good keyword coverage'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"for Engram contributors" carves out a clear niche with low conflict risk, fitting 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'. Not 5 because broad trigger terms like 'Decisions… discoveries' could overlap with generic note-taking or journaling skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

Gentleman-Programming/engram

Path

skills/memory-protocol/SKILL.md

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.