CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

lean-build

Build feature work with high overbuilding risk. Use for new behavior, product slices, or integrations where repository reuse, strict scope, and an explicit stop condition matter.

59

Quality

67%

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/lean-build/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 admirably lean and appropriately structured for a compact skill, but its directives stay high-level: it lacks concrete execution steps, numbered sequencing, and an explicit validate-fix-retry loop around its acceptance check.

Suggestions

Number the bullets into an explicit build sequence (acceptance → trace → deliver → reuse → omit → verify) so the workflow order is unambiguous.

Add a brief validate-fix-retry loop around 'Run focused proof' (e.g., 'If the proof fails, fix the smallest responsible layer and re-run; stop only when acceptance passes').

Give one or two directives a concrete, executable anchor (e.g., name the command or test pattern used for the 'focused proof') to lift actionability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely lean: terse intro, seven tight bullets, and a two-sentence close with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

The bullets give concrete directives (derive acceptance, trace entry point, omit modes/providers/config/extensibility) with some specific lists, but as an instruction-only skill it lacks the concrete steps or worked examples needed to fully execute each directive.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A rough sequence is derivable from the bullets and the closing 'Run focused proof. Stop when acceptance passes.' provides a validation checkpoint, but steps are unnumbered, the ordering between principles is implicit, and there is no error-recovery feedback loop.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A short (under 50 lines), single-purpose skill with no need for external references, organized into a heading, intro, bullet list, and closing line — meeting the simple-skill exception for well-organized structure.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 cleanly answers both 'what' and 'when' with concrete trigger situations and a distinct overbuilding-risk niche, but leans on abstract phrasing and specialized jargon over natural, varied user keywords.

Suggestions

Add more concrete action verbs (e.g., 'Scope, reuse, and ship feature work') so capabilities read as actions rather than criteria.

Broaden trigger terms with common synonyms a user would actually say (e.g., 'add a feature', 'build a product slice', 'wire up an integration').

Soften jargon like 'repository reuse' and 'explicit stop condition' with plainer equivalents to improve naturalness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('feature work with high overbuilding risk') and lists several specific situations ('new behavior, product slices, or integrations') plus criteria (reuse, scope, stop condition), but the actions stay fairly abstract rather than enumerating concrete capabilities.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly states both what ('Build feature work with high overbuilding risk') and when ('Use for new behavior, product slices, or integrations where...'), with concrete trigger phrases; the 'when' could be slightly more specific but is clearly present.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some natural user-facing terms ('new behavior', 'product slices', 'integrations') alongside jargon ('repository reuse', 'explicit stop condition'), but misses common synonyms or variations a user might naturally say.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'high overbuilding risk' framing plus reuse/scope/stop-condition criteria carve a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against generic build or feature skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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
JuliusBrussee/caveman
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.