CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

plan-task

Refine a draft task specification into a fully planned, implementation-ready task with acceptance criteria, architecture, per-step sub-task files and verifiable phases

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/sdd/skills/plan-task/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%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 skill is a well-sequenced orchestration workflow with strong validation gates and feedback loops, scoring highly on clarity and actionability, but it is verbose with repeated rule restatements and bundles everything into a single monolithic file rather than progressively disclosing detail into reference files.

Suggestions

Extract the four full judge rubrics (Judge 2a/2b/2c/3/4) into ./references/judge-rubrics.md and link to them, reducing inline bulk while keeping the decision logic in SKILL.md.

Move the Model Selection Policy (Selection Rules, Phase Weighting, Escalation Rule) into ./references/model-selection.md, leaving a one-paragraph summary and a link in the body.

De-duplicate the Iteration Discretion Rule and CRITICAL blocks by stating each rule once and cross-referencing it, cutting the rationale padding that re-explains why model tiering matters.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly procedural and efficient, but repeats rules verbatim ("the ONLY statement of this rule" restatements, repeated CRITICAL blocks) and over-explains rationale Claude already knows (model-tier leverage justifications), which the rubric penalizes; it does not reach the minor-trim level of 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

It provides concrete agent types, prompt templates, argument-parsing pseudocode, TodoWrite JSON, weighted rubrics, and bash commands, but leaves placeholder slots like <TASK_FILE> and prompt templates rather than fully copy-paste-ready material, keeping it just below 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is explicitly sequenced (2a/2b/2c → 3 → 4 → promote) with per-phase judge validation gates, an Implementation→Judge FAIL→Retry→MAX_ITERATIONS feedback loop, ASCII diagrams, and a dedicated Error Handling section — matching the explicit-validation-and-feedback-loops anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist under ./references, ./scripts, or ./assets, so the ~1230-line body inlines large blocks (full judge rubrics, the entire Model Selection Policy) that would be better split into referenced files; structure is present via headers but referenceable content stays inline.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

63%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 is specific and enumerates concrete deliverables, but it omits any explicit "when to use" trigger guidance and relies on domain jargon rather than natural user phrases, capping completeness and trigger-term quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when refining a draft task spec created by /add-task into an implementation-ready plan, or when the user asks to plan a task, build acceptance criteria, or decompose a feature into steps."

Add natural synonyms users say, such as "task spec", ".feature.md", "plan a task", alongside the existing domain terms.

Disambiguate from sibling commands by contrasting with /add-task (which creates the draft) to reduce overlap-trigger risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates five concrete deliverables — "acceptance criteria, architecture, per-step sub-task files and verifiable phases" — matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does but provides no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the guidelines cap at 3; a 4 would require an explicit, if imperfect, when.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It uses domain-internal terms like "draft task specification", "acceptance criteria", and "sub-task files" but lacks the natural synonyms/extensions a user would actually say (e.g. "plan a task", "task spec", ".feature.md"), so it stops at the some-relevant-keywords anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "refine a draft task into a fully planned, implementation-ready task" niche is mostly distinct from sibling skills, with only minor overlap risk against related planning commands like /add-task.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (1235 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit

Path

plugins/sdd/skills/plan-task/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.