basecamp-automation
Automate Basecamp project management, to-dos, messages, people, and to-do list organization via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:Lingjie-chen/MT5 --skill basecamp-automation63
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%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 identifies Basecamp as the target platform and lists feature areas, but lacks concrete action verbs and explicit trigger guidance. The technical implementation detail ('Rube MCP', 'Composio', 'search tools first') takes up space that should be used for user-facing trigger terms and a clear 'Use when...' clause.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when the user mentions Basecamp, needs to manage projects, create to-dos, send messages to team members, or organize task lists.'
Replace feature area nouns with concrete action verbs: 'Create and manage to-dos, send and read messages, organize to-do lists, manage team members' instead of just listing 'to-dos, messages, people'.
Remove implementation details ('Rube MCP', 'Composio', 'search tools first') and use that space for natural user keywords like 'tasks', 'team collaboration', 'project tracking'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Basecamp project management) and lists several actions (to-dos, messages, people, to-do list organization), but these are more like feature areas than concrete actions. Missing specific verbs like 'create', 'update', 'delete', 'assign'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (automate Basecamp features) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance. The instruction to 'search tools first' is implementation detail, not usage guidance. Per rubric, missing explicit trigger guidance caps this at 2, but the 'what' is also weak, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'Basecamp', 'project management', 'to-dos', 'messages' which are relevant keywords users might say. However, missing common variations like 'tasks', 'team communication', 'project tracking', or specific Basecamp terminology users would naturally use. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Basecamp' is a specific product name which helps distinctiveness, but 'project management' is generic and could overlap with other PM tools (Asana, Trello, Jira). The Rube MCP/Composio reference adds some specificity but is technical jargon. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, highly actionable skill for Basecamp automation with clear tool sequences and explicit parameter documentation. The workflow clarity is excellent with labeled step dependencies and comprehensive pitfall warnings. However, the skill is verbose with redundant information across sections and could benefit from better progressive disclosure by splitting detailed workflows into separate reference files.
Suggestions
Consolidate the 'Known Pitfalls' section with inline pitfalls to avoid repetition of ID format warnings and status field issues
Move the Quick Reference table to a separate REFERENCE.md file and link to it from the main skill
Remove redundant alternative tool mentions (e.g., 'Alternative group creation tool [Alternative]') since the quick reference already documents alternatives
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive but includes some redundancy (alternative tools listed multiple times, repeated pitfalls across sections). The quick reference table duplicates information already covered in workflows. Could be tightened by consolidating common pitfalls and removing redundant tool alternatives. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete tool sequences with specific parameter names, types, and values. Key parameters are clearly documented with data types (Integer, Array, Boolean) and format requirements (YYYY-MM-DD, HTML). The quick reference table makes tool selection immediately actionable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Each workflow has numbered steps with clear labels ([Prerequisite], [Required], [Optional], [Alternative]). Tool sequences show explicit dependencies and the ID resolution pattern provides a clear top-down validation approach. Pitfalls sections serve as validation checkpoints for each workflow. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but the skill is monolithic at ~250 lines. The quick reference table could be a separate file. No external references for advanced topics despite linking to external toolkit docs. The five core workflows could benefit from being split into separate files with SKILL.md as an overview. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.