vibe-handoff

Prepare compact factual project context for another session or coding tool without copying transcripts or secrets.

Quality

61%

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 ./.agents/skills/vibe-handoff/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 notably lean and actionable, listing concrete inspection targets and handoff sections. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: it lacks an explicit validation checkpoint/feedback loop for the destructive/batch risks it guards against, and it is a single unsectioned paragraph.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation checkpoint, e.g. "Before writing the handoff, verify the working-tree state and confirm which checks actually ran with dates/results; do not infer successes."

Break the single paragraph into short labeled sections (e.g. "## Inspect", "## Write the handoff", "## Guardrails") to lift progressive_disclosure to 5 and make the sequence explicit.

Optionally include a one-line handoff template or example section list to move actionability from 4 toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a lean single paragraph with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place, matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
Actionability	It gives concrete instructional guidance listing exact things to inspect and named handoff sections, but as an instruction-only skill it lacks executable commands or examples, sitting just below the fully copy-paste-ready anchor 5 at anchor 4.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough two-phase sequence is present (inspect, then write) with guardrail constraints, but there is no explicit validate-checkpoint/feedback loop, and since the skill guards against destructive actions (committing uncommitted changes, inferring checks) the rubric's validation cap holds it at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no external references and is reasonably well-organized, but it is essentially one unsectioned paragraph rather than clearly organized sections, so it sits at anchor 4 rather than the simple-skill anchor 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

46%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 states a clear purpose but lacks any explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness and weakens trigger-term quality. It is reasonably distinct but would benefit from a "Use when..." clause naming natural user phrases.

Suggestions

Add a "Use when..." trigger clause naming natural phrases users would say, e.g. "Use when handing off a project to another session, coder, or tool, or when the user asks for a status handoff or context summary."

Expand the action list beyond the single "prepare" verb to concrete sub-actions (inspect branch/changes, gather checks, write the handoff sections) to lift specificity from 3 toward 4-5.

Include natural synonyms and file references (e.g. "handoff", "MEMORY.md", "AGENTS.md") to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Prepare compact factual project context for another session or coding tool" names the domain and one concrete action with qualifiers, but does not list multiple specific actions, matching anchor 3 rather than the multi-action anchor 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It has a clear "what" (prepare compact factual project context) but no "when"/"Use when..." trigger guidance, so per the rubric's explicit cap it stays at 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It uses a couple of generic domain words ("project context", "session") but omits natural phrases a user would say (e.g. "handoff", "handoff context") and has no trigger clause, fitting anchor 2 over anchor 3.	2 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The project-handoff/context-transfer niche is mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against closely related context-gathering skills, matching anchor 4 better than the broader anchor 3.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: KhazP/vibe-coding-prompt-template
Path: .agents/skills/vibe-handoff/SKILL.md
Commit: b00eb84

Reviewed: 4 days 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.