CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

engram-sdd-flow

Spec-Driven Development workflow for Engram. Trigger: When user requests SDD or multi-phase implementation planning.

67

Quality

80%

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/sdd-flow/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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 concise, well-structured process overview with a clear phase sequence and validation checkpoints, scoring well on conciseness, workflow clarity, and progressive disclosure. Its main weakness is actionability: the phase and artifact descriptions stay abstract and would benefit from concrete, executable specifics.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable guidance per phase, e.g. specific commands or exact steps for 'apply' and 'verify' instead of 'code + tests' and 'evidence of validation'.

Specify a feedback loop for the verify phase: what to do when verification fails (fix -> re-verify) so error recovery is explicit rather than implied.

Define what each 'Artifact per Phase' concretely looks like (e.g. a short file or section name and required fields) so the artifacts are actionable rather than one-word labels.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with no concept explanations or padding; every section (phase order, artifacts, exit criteria) earns its place and assumes Claude's competence. It matches the level-3 'lean and efficient' anchor and is not level 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to tighten.

3 / 3

Actionability

Phrases like 'understand existing behavior and constraints' and 'Apply: code + tests' give structure but remain abstract with no concrete commands or specifics. It is above level 1 (which merely describes) because a phase list and checklist exist, but below level 3 because nothing is copy-paste ready or concrete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The numbered 'explore -> propose -> apply -> verify -> archive' sequence plus an explicit 'verify' phase and an 'Exit Criteria' checklist provide clear sequencing with validation checkpoints. It is above level 2 because checkpoints are explicit rather than implicit, satisfying the level-3 'clear sequence with validation steps and checklist' anchor.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no external references needed and is organized into clear sections (When to Use, Phase Order, Artifacts, Exit Criteria). Per the rubric's simple-skills guideline this earns a 3; it is not level 2 because the content is appropriately organized rather than a monolithic or poorly-signaled block.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 states both purpose and an explicit trigger, giving it strong completeness and distinctiveness, but it stays abstract on concrete actions and offers limited natural trigger variations. It is effective but could be sharpened with specific verbs and more user-natural terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Phrases like 'Spec-Driven Development workflow for Engram' name the domain and imply actions, but 'workflow' is abstract with no concrete verbs like 'extract' or 'generate'. It is not the level-3 anchor (which lists multiple specific concrete actions) and above level 1 (which is purely vague).

2 / 3

Completeness

'Spec-Driven Development workflow for Engram' states what it does and 'Trigger: When user requests SDD or multi-phase implementation planning' gives explicit trigger guidance, answering both what and when. It cannot be 2 because explicit trigger guidance is present (which caps at 2 only when missing).

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'When user requests SDD or multi-phase implementation planning' supplies relevant keywords, but 'SDD' leans toward jargon and common natural variations are thin. It is below the level-3 anchor's broad term coverage yet above level 1's pure technical jargon.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Engram-specific SDD niche with distinct triggers is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. It is above level 2 ('could still overlap') because the scope and triggers are narrowly scoped to a specific workflow.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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.