why

Iterative Five Whys root cause analysis drilling from symptoms to fundamentals

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/kaizen/skills/why/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

70%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a solid instruction-only skill that effectively teaches the Five Whys methodology through well-structured examples of increasing complexity. Its main weakness is some redundancy between the Notes section and earlier content, and the Steps section could be more specific about expected output format. The multi-branch example is a particularly strong addition that demonstrates handling real-world complexity.

Suggestions

Remove duplicate guidance in Notes (e.g., 'Document each why' and branching advice appear in both Steps and Notes) to improve conciseness.

Specify an explicit output format template (e.g., markdown structure with Problem, Why 1-N, Root Cause, Solution headers) so Claude produces consistent output.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill has some redundancy—the Notes section repeats points already made (e.g., 'Document each why' appears twice, branching is mentioned in both Steps and Notes). The Description section restates what the title and first line already convey. However, the examples are efficient and earn their space.	2 / 3
Actionability	The three examples are concrete and illustrative, showing the exact format of a Five Whys analysis with clear problem→root cause→solution chains. However, this is an instruction-only skill with no executable code, and the Steps section is somewhat generic ('Ask why and document the answer'). The guidance is actionable but could be more specific about output format expectations.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 7-step workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit validation checkpoint (step 5: 'Validate by working backwards: root cause → symptom') and branching guidance (step 6). The examples reinforce the workflow with concrete demonstrations including the multi-branch case. The Notes section adds a feedback loop for solutions (implement → verify → monitor).	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a standalone skill with no bundle files, the content is well-organized into logical sections (Usage, Variables, Steps, Examples, Notes) without being monolithic. The three examples progressively increase in complexity (simple → CI/CD → multi-branch). No external references are needed for this self-contained analytical skill.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

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 a specific methodology (Five Whys) which gives it some distinctiveness, but it reads more like a title than a functional description. It lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), concrete action steps, and natural user-facing keywords that would help Claude reliably select this skill.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to investigate why a problem occurred, asks for root cause analysis, or needs to drill down into the underlying cause of an issue.'

List specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Guides iterative questioning through five layers of causation, identifies root causes, and produces a structured analysis document with findings and recommended corrective actions.'

Include natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'why did this happen', 'troubleshooting', 'RCA', 'problem investigation', 'incident postmortem', or 'find the root cause'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Five Whys root cause analysis') and describes the general action ('drilling from symptoms to fundamentals'), but doesn't list multiple concrete actions like generating reports, creating action plans, or documenting findings.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (Five Whys root cause analysis) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also only moderately clear, warranting a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'Five Whys', 'root cause analysis', and 'symptoms', but misses common natural variations users might say such as 'why did this happen', 'problem investigation', 'troubleshooting', 'incident analysis', or 'RCA'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'Five Whys' methodology is fairly specific and distinguishable, but 'root cause analysis' could overlap with other analytical or debugging skills. The lack of explicit trigger conditions increases conflict risk.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 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

Repository: NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
Commit: 3711edf

Reviewed: 20 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.