sdd-spec

Write SDD delta specs with requirements and scenarios. Trigger: orchestrator launches spec work for a change.

Quality

71%

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 ./internal/assets/skills/sdd-spec/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

76%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 highly actionable and well-structured with concrete templates and file paths. Its main limitation is the absence of an explicit validation/feedback loop for a destructive batch operation, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validate->fix->retry checkpoint in Step 4 (e.g., after writing a MODIFIED block, verify it contains every original scenario before persisting, and loop back if not) to lift the workflow clarity cap.

Move the large delta-spec-format template (lines ~111-191) into a reference file and reference it from the body to tighten progressive disclosure.

Trim the Language Domain Contract and Execution Role prose to the essential rule, since the delegate-only behavior is already implied by the frontmatter.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean and structural (tree diagrams, code blocks, rules, templates) with only minor over-explanation, e.g. the Language Domain Contract and Execution Role prose that could be trimmed slightly.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready guidance: concrete file paths, a complete delta spec format template, an RFC 2119 keyword table, and exact per-mode workflow branches covering the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The six-step sequence is clearly listed with critical callouts, but this destructive/batch file-writing operation lacks an explicit validate->fix->retry feedback loop in the skill itself, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the rubric.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well organized into clearly headed sections and external shared docs are referenced one level deep with clear signals ("Follow Section B/C from sdd-phase-common.md"); minor gaps include the large inline delta-format template that could partly live in a reference file.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 concisely states what the skill produces and gives an explicit trigger, with a clearly distinct niche. Its main weakness is that the trigger term is procedural orchestrator jargon rather than natural user-facing language.

Suggestions

Rewrite the trigger in natural user language (e.g., "Use when the orchestrator needs to turn a change proposal into structured requirements and Given/When/Then scenarios") so it reads as something a user would actually say.

Add concrete artifact types beyond "requirements and scenarios" (e.g., ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED/RENAMED delta sections) to broaden the specificity of capabilities.

Consider listing the supported artifact store modes (engram/openspec/hybrid) briefly so the description previews the skill's actual scope.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("SDD delta specs") and two concrete artifacts ("requirements and scenarios") but coverage is not comprehensive, matching the anchor listing 1-2 concrete actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both "what" ("Write SDD delta specs with requirements and scenarios") and "when" ("Trigger: orchestrator launches spec work for a change") are present and explicit, though the trigger could be more specific to user-facing intent.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains relevant domain terms ("spec", "requirements", "scenarios") but the trigger phrase "orchestrator launches spec work for a change" is procedural jargon rather than natural user language, missing common phrasings a user would say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"SDD delta specs with requirements and scenarios" carves a clear niche distinct from sibling design/tasks skills, with minimal risk of triggering for the wrong skill.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 2 missing, 2 deeper-than-1-level	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai
Path: internal/assets/skills/sdd-spec/SKILL.md
Commit: a245f26

Reviewed: 1 day 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.