tutorial

Interactive tutorial teaching Ouroboros hands-on

Quality

59%

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 ./skills/tutorial/SKILL.md

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 body is a well-sequenced, actionable tutorial script with checkpoints and branching responses for user confusion. Its main weaknesses are length/redundancy across meta-sections and the absence of any progressive disclosure to reference files despite being well over 50 lines.

Suggestions

Trim the overlapping meta-sections (Tutorial Principles, Success Metrics, Checkpoints) into a single concise progress-tracking block to reduce redundancy.

Move the longer peripheral material (Tutorial Variations, Common Tutorial Responses) into reference files (e.g. variations.md, fallbacks.md) and link to them from the main flow to improve progressive disclosure.

Specify the underspecified placeholders (e.g. give a concrete mini-seed structure example and the exact Socratic question set) so the tutorial is fully copy-paste ready.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly purposeful scripted tutorial content, but at ~240 lines it includes overlapping meta-sections (Tutorial Principles, Checkpoints, Success Metrics, Variations) that restate the same ideas and could be tightened, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than the lean anchor at 4.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete scripted dialogue and specific real commands (ooo interview, ooo seed, ooo run, ooo evaluate) make it largely executable, but placeholders like '[Display a simplified seed structure]' and '[Ask 3-4 targeted Socratic questions]' leave minor gaps, matching 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps' rather than fully copy-paste ready at 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The six phases are clearly sequenced with timings, the Tutorial Checkpoints act as a checklist, and the Common Tutorial Responses section provides feedback loops for error recovery (user confusion, no idea, skepticism), matching the 'clear sequence with explicit checkpoints and feedback loops' anchor. This is a non-destructive tutorial so the batch/destructive cap does not apply.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized with clear headers, but the skill is a single ~240-line file with no external references and substantial content (Common Tutorial Responses, Tutorial Variations, phase scripts) that could plausibly live in separate reference files is inlined, matching 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline'.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

48%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 names a specific tool and purpose but is thin: it lacks any 'Use when' trigger guidance and uses only minimal generic action words. It is distinguishable but not comprehensive or trigger-rich.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases (e.g. 'Use when the user wants to learn Ouroboros, asks for a tutorial or walkthrough, or is new to the Ouroboros workflow').

Replace generic verbs ('teaching', 'hands-on') with specific concrete actions the tutorial performs (e.g. 'Guides users through a live interview, generates a starter seed, and demos the core Ouroboros commands').

Include natural synonyms users might say ('learn Ouroboros', 'Ouroboros walkthrough', 'get started with Ouroboros') to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase 'Interactive tutorial teaching Ouroboros hands-on' names the domain (Ouroboros) but the actions ('teaching', 'interactive tutorial') are minimal and generic, matching the 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' anchor rather than the multi-action anchor at 3.	2 / 5
Completeness	It states a clear 'what' (an interactive hands-on Ouroboros tutorial) but provides no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance for 'when', which the guidelines cap at 3 — matching the 'clear what but when missing' anchor.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'tutorial' and 'Ouroboros' are relevant, somewhat natural keywords a user might say, but common variations or synonyms (e.g. 'learn', 'walkthrough', 'guide') are missing, fitting the 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Naming the specific tool 'Ouroboros' gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, but the lack of explicit distinct trigger phrases keeps it just below the comprehensive anchor at 5.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: Q00/ouroboros
Path: skills/tutorial/SKILL.md
Commit: 80333ae

Reviewed: 3 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.