CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

cause-and-effect

Systematic Fishbone analysis exploring problem causes across six categories

Quality

71%

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 ./antigravity/skills/cause-and-effect/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is cause-and-effect in NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 with concrete category prompts, a prioritization formula, and complete output-format examples, and the workflow is clearly sequenced. The main weakness is verbosity from three redundant full examples and a Notes section that restates the Steps.

Suggestions

Trim to one comprehensive worked example plus a brief second one, or move the additional examples into a separate references file, to reduce token redundancy.

Consolidate the Notes section with the Steps where guidance overlaps (e.g., 'dig deeper' and 'prioritize solutions') to avoid restating instructions.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint such as 're-check each root cause against the stated problem before proposing solutions' to elevate workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but three near-identical full worked examples plus a Notes section that repeats guidance from the Steps could be tightened; more than minor over-explanation but not padded with basics.

3 / 5

Actionability

As an instruction skill it gives concrete category lists with sub-prompts, an explicit 'ask why' technique, a priority formula ('impact x feasibility / effort'), and three copy-ready output-format examples covering common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly sequenced steps form a logical flow for a non-destructive analysis task; soft checkpoints exist in steps 4-5 but they are not framed as explicit validation/feedback loops, so it sits just below 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized sections (Description, Usage, Variables, Steps, Examples, Notes) and self-contained with no nested references; the three large inlined examples arguably belong in a separate examples file, a minor organization gap keeping it below 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 clearly states what the skill does but omits any 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps completeness and trigger discoverability. It is reasonably distinct and specific but would benefit from explicit usage triggers and common synonyms.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases such as 'root cause analysis', 'Ishikawa diagram', or 'investigate why a problem is happening'.

Include common synonyms ('Ishikawa', 'root cause analysis') alongside 'Fishbone' to improve trigger-term coverage.

List one or two more concrete actions (e.g., 'prioritize root causes by impact', 'propose corrective solutions') to raise specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Fishbone analysis') and one concrete action ('exploring problem causes across six categories') but does not list several specific actions; fits the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (Fishbone analysis across six categories) but no 'Use when...' trigger clause; per rubric guidance, a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Fishbone' and 'problem causes' are relevant keywords, but common synonyms users would naturally say ('Ishikawa', 'root cause analysis', 'why did X happen') are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming a specific named methodology (Fishbone) gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk; minor overlap with general root-cause skills keeps it just below 5.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit

Path

antigravity/skills/cause-and-effect/SKILL.md

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.