planner-task-packet

Draft CCB workflow task packets, readiness recommendations, and candidate clarification questions without mutating authoritative state.

Quality

72%

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 ./docs/plantree/plans/agentic-loop-workflow/drafts/agentroles.ccb_planner/skills/planner-task-packet/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%

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 with exact artifact templates and strong fail-closed validation logic, and it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. Its main weaknesses are repeated route/readiness rules across sections and a long single-file structure with no progressive offloading of detail to reference files.

Suggestions

Deduplicate the per-route readiness rules: state them once and have the Bounded Post-Detail Stop section reference the ordinary rule instead of restating it.

Consider moving the detailed Bounded Post-Detail Stop constraint checklist and the Git-capability verification guidance into a reference file linked from the body to shorten the inline spec.

Keep a compact 'route -> readiness shape' table at the top so the trailing prose paragraphs can be trimmed without losing the mapping.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is information-dense with no concept filler Claude already knows, but the per-route readiness rules (needs_detail/blocked/direct_execution/partial_completion) are restated in the Bounded Post-Detail Stop section and again in the trailing route paragraphs, so it is 'mostly efficient but includes some repetition that could be tightened' rather than fully lean.	2 / 3
Actionability	Exact fenced labels, literal JSON templates ('{"readiness":"ready",...}'), an enumerated readiness-value set, and concrete unittest discovery commands make the guidance copy-paste ready and fully actionable, matching the top anchor for an instruction-only skill.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Route determination flows into readiness assignment with explicit validation checkpoints — the Bounded Post-Detail Stop enumerates required fields and mandates fail-closed behavior ('If any required constraint field is absent, stale, malformed... fail closed'), providing clear condition handling and error-recovery guidance.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is a single ~210-line file with clear section headings and no nested references, but no bundle files exist and detailed route/bounded-exception rules are all inline; this fits 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' rather than the well-split top anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

67%

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 occupies a clearly distinct niche, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance and leans on internal jargon ('CCB') rather than natural user-facing keywords. Completeness and trigger-term quality are the limiting dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when converting a macro user intent or frontdesk request into a reviewable CCB plan artifact.'

Soften the undefined 'CCB' acronym with a natural-language gloss or include common phrasings a requester would actually say (e.g. 'plan task', 'readiness check', 'clarifying questions').

Mirror a user-facing verb in the trigger so the skill surfaces on natural requests, not only on internal system terminology.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Quotes 'Draft CCB workflow task packets, readiness recommendations, and candidate clarification questions without mutating authoritative state' — three concrete deliverable actions plus an explicit constraint, matching the anchor that lists multiple specific concrete actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is explicit (draft task packets, readiness recs, clarification questions) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the judging guideline completeness is capped at 2 ('Has what, but when is missing or only implied').	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'CCB workflow task packets', 'readiness recommendations', and 'candidate clarification questions' are domain/internal jargon a user would not naturally say; some relevant action nouns exist but common natural variations are missing, so it sits at the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor rather than 3, and is not score-1 vague.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche — drafting CCB planning artifacts 'without mutating authoritative state' — is narrow and specialized, making it clearly distinguishable and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers; unlikely to conflict' anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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: SeemSeam/claude_codex_bridge
Path: docs/plantree/plans/agentic-loop-workflow/drafts/agentroles.ccb_planner/skills/planner-task-packet/SKILL.md
Commit: ec3de76

Reviewed: about 10 hours 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.