CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ask

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

60

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./inherit_skills/claude_skills/ask/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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 highly actionable and workflow-clear, giving exact command forms, a decision checklist, and error-recovery feedback loops without padding. Its only weakness is mild repetition of the --chain/--silence rules and a slightly long single-file layout that could be tightened.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense operational guidance that assumes Claude already knows what CCB is, with no padded concept explanations; the only slack is mild repetition of --chain/--silence rules across the Decision Card and Guardrails, fitting the score-4 anchor of efficient content with minor trim opportunities.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides a copy-paste-ready heredoc command form plus a worked flag example, concrete error strings to match on ('ask --chain requires an active parent job'), and explicit retry/resubmit steps, matching the score-5 anchor of fully executable guidance covering common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The numbered Decision Card is an explicit pre-send checklist, the Guardrails define error-recovery feedback loops (retry plain ask on --chain rejection; cancel and resubmit on rejected/too_late/terminal), and the terminal 'end the turn, do not poll' checkpoint is unambiguous, matching the score-5 anchor of a clear sequence with explicit checkpoints and feedback loops.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files and the skill is self-contained with well-labeled sections (Decision Card, Guardrails, command template, end-turn note), so it avoids nested references; at ~94 lines it sits just over the under-50-line simple-skill threshold, landing at the score-4 anchor of good structure with minor organization gaps rather than a clean 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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 is specific to its CCB-delegation niche and largely conflict-free, but it only states one action and omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger, which caps completeness and trigger quality at the mid-range.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' trigger clause to the description, e.g. 'Use when delegating work to a CCB agent or when project memory says to use CCB `ask` for collaboration.'

List one or two more concrete actions or outcomes (e.g. 'delegate tasks, request analysis, hand off work') to raise specificity above a single action.

Include natural user phrasing synonyms such as 'delegate' or 'collaborate' alongside 'request' so the description matches what users actually say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('CCB agent') and one concrete action ('Send a request ... with `ask`'), matching the score-3 anchor of naming a domain with 1-2 concrete actions, but it does not list several specific actions to reach 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

It gives a clear 'what' ('Send a request to a CCB agent with `ask`') but no 'when' / trigger clause; per the rubric a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3, which is the exact score-3 anchor.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant terms ('CCB agent', 'ask', 'request'), but these are fairly technical/specialized and it misses common natural variations a user might say (e.g. 'delegate', 'collaborate'), fitting the score-3 anchor of some relevant keywords missing synonyms.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The phrase 'CCB agent with `ask`' carves a clear, narrow niche with minimal conflict risk versus other skills, but the terseness keeps it just short of the comprehensive score-5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation15 / 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.