CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

software-viability

Software and technology viability validator — deep forensic analysis of whether proposed software solutions, AI/ML components, and technology choices are viable substance or speculative smoke. Covers service viability, platform viability, methodology viability, tool viability, and vendor assessment for any service type. Use when the user asks to 'validate technology viability', 'detect vaporware', 'verify AI claims', 'assess software maturity', 'check if this tech actually works', or mentions technology due diligence, software validation, AI feasibility, vendor evaluation, or tech-stack viability. This is the devoted software-specific validator — separate and more critical than the multidimensional feasibility analysis. [EXPLICIT]

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Service & Technology Viability: Substance vs Smoke Validator

Generic, brand-neutral engineering capability; deep, sourced playbooks live in references/ and knowledge/. [DOC]

Generic, brand-neutral engineering capability; sourced playbooks in references//knowledge/. [DOC]

TL;DR

Forensic validation of whether proposed software solutions, technology choices, and AI/ML components are viable, mature, and fit-for-purpose — or speculative, overhyped, and risky. This is NOT the multidimensional feasibility analysis (technical-feasibility covers that). This is a devoted, deep-cut software validator that operates at the level of code, APIs, vendor maturity, community health, and real-world production evidence [EXPLICIT]

When to use

  • Use for the software viability capability. [EXPLICIT]
  • NOT for adjacent domains — route to the matching skill. [INFERENCE]

Sub-capabilities (resource map)

Deep, evidence-tagged playbooks — open the one the task needs (ICM Layer 3, on-demand). [INFERENCE]

Reference
references/full-playbook.md
references/knowledge-graph.mmd
references/state-of-the-art.md

Procedure

  1. Resolve the sub-capability; open the matching references/ playbook. [EXPLICIT]
  2. Apply its decision tables; pick the strategy explicitly. [EXPLICIT]
  3. Validate against the Quality Criteria and tag every claim. [EXPLICIT]

Quality Criteria

  • Sub-capability resolved to one playbook. [INFERENCE]
  • Claims evidence-tagged. [EXPLICIT]

Contract

  • Aceptación: capability resolved to its reference playbook, applied, validated, evidence-tagged. [EXPLICIT]
  • Límites: scoped to this capability; deep procedure in references/. [EXPLICIT]
  • Casos borde: Scenario Response --- --- Vendor provides only marketing materials Flag as 🟠 minimum. Request technical docs, API reference, benchmark methodology Technology is < 6. [EXPLICIT]
  • Supuestos: · WebFetch available for public data (GitHub, docs, benchmarks); gated content requires user provision · AI evaluation limited to publicly verifiable claims; proprietary model inte. [SUPUESTO]
  • Trade-off: Decision Enables Constrains When to Use --- --- --- --- Full stack validation Maximum confidence 3-5 days Pre-commitment, large investment AI-only validatio. [EXPLICIT]

Packet

Capas del packet, cargables bajo demanda (disciplina ICM: una capa por vez, nunca todas juntas): references/ guías de profundidad (cargar UNA por etapa) · knowledge/ cuerpo de conocimiento · prompts/ prompts listos · examples/ salida de ejemplo · agents/ subagentes del packet · assets/ recursos estáticos.

Repository
JaviMontano/claude-plugins
Last updated
First committed

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.