CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ask

Send a request to a CCB agent with `ask`.

48

Quality

52%

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 ./inherit_skills/codex_skills/ask/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 dense, operational, and highly actionable: a decision procedure, concrete command templates, explicit error-recovery behavior, and a clear submit-then-stop protocol, with no filler or background explanation. Its main weaknesses are redundancy — chain/continuation routing rules are stated three or more times across the guardrails — and a long undifferentiated bullet list that would benefit from grouping. No bundle files are needed or present, and disclosure within the single file is adequate.

Suggestions

Consolidate the --chain/continuation-routing rules that currently appear in the Decision Card and again across three or more guardrail bullets into one authoritative 'Chain rules' group.

Group the 25-bullet Guardrails list into labeled clusters (chain routing, artifact flags, corrections/diagnostics, submit behavior) so the relevant rule can be located without scanning the whole list.

State the $TARGET/$MESSAGE substitution convention and the role of the literal `command` prefix once so the invocation templates are unambiguously copy-paste executable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is telegraphic and free of padding or explanations of known concepts, but the ~25-bullet Guardrails flat list repeats --chain and continuation-routing rules across several bullets (e.g., the chain guidance in the Decision Card reappears in the bullets at 'Do not probe --chain', 'Plain nested ask...', and 'If the current task is a CCB result-chain continuation...'). Mostly efficient, but noticeably could be tightened — anchor 3.

3 / 5

Actionability

Two concrete heredoc invocation templates with explicit flag placement, plus exact command names for diagnostics (ask get, pend, watch, ping) and correction (ccb followup <active_job_id> --message "<correction>") make the guidance mostly executable. Minor gaps: the literal `command` prefix and $TARGET/$MESSAGE substitution conventions are left implicit, so it is not fully copy-paste ready — anchor 4.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The numbered Decision Card sequences the pre-ask decisions, and there is an explicit error-recovery checkpoint ("If CCB says 'ask --chain requires an active parent job', retry once with plain ask") plus a clear terminal rule ("After submit, stop. Do not wait... do not poll"). It falls short of anchor 5 because validation covers only one error case and the remaining recovery guidance is scattered across guardrail bullets rather than forming a coherent loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ absent), and the skill is a single self-contained file with well-labeled sections (Decision Card, Guardrails, invocation). Structure is good, but the body runs ~85 lines with an ungrouped 25-bullet guardrail list that could be subgrouped (chain rules, artifact rules, diagnostics) — a minor organization gap, anchor 4.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

37%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 extremely terse: it states one action and nothing about when the skill applies or what its flag-based capabilities are. It names its niche (CCB delegation via `ask`) but provides no trigger phrases and no usage conditions, capping both completeness and trigger quality. The body of the skill contains the real trigger guidance ("Use this skill when the user asks you to delegate with CCB") which should be surfaced into the description.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., "Use when the user asks to delegate, hand off, or collaborate with a CCB agent, or when project memory says to use CCB ask."

Enumerate the concrete capabilities reflected in the body: chained child dependencies (--chain), fire-and-forget sends (--silence), compact results, and artifact request/reply modes.

Include natural user synonyms (delegate, hand off, ask another agent, CCB collaboration) so the description matches phrases users actually say, not just the internal flag jargon.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Send a request to a CCB agent with `ask`" names the domain but offers only one minimal, generic action, matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It is above 1 because the domain and tool are concretely named, but below 3 because no second concrete capability (e.g., chaining, silent sends, artifact mode) is mentioned.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (send a request to a CCB agent using `ask`) but there is no 'when to use it' clause anywhere in the description. Per the judging guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The only keywords are "CCB", "ask", and "send a request" — technical jargon with no natural phrases a user would say (e.g., "delegate", "hand off", "collaborate"). This fits anchor 2 ('one or two generic keywords; missing the natural phrases users say') better than 3, which expects a fuller set of relevant keywords.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"CCB agent" carves out a distinct niche, but the bare word `ask` is generic English and the description is so terse it could overlap with other delegation/messaging skills. This is 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills' (3) rather than 'mostly distinct' (4).

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
SeemSeam/claude_codex_bridge
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.