enrichment-module-builder

Build a new Nemesis file enrichment module end-to-end with explicit user approval gates for output mode, library choice, sample files, and integration testing.

1.41x

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

99%

1.41x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/enrichment-module-builder/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 content is a strong, well-sequenced workflow with executable templates and robust validation/feedback loops, but it is verbose and monolithic where splitting large templates into reference files would improve token efficiency and navigation.

Suggestions

Move the large analyzer.py, test, and recommendation-format templates into reference files (e.g. references/templates/) and link to them from SKILL.md to reduce inline bulk.

Collapse the four repeated 'STOP: ... Prefer request_user_input when available' notes into one canonical gate instruction referenced by each step.

Trim the Overview's explanation of what enrichment modules are and the placeholder-heavy recommendation templates to assume more baseline knowledge.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly actionable but noticeably padded: repeated 'STOP...Prefer request_user_input' blocks, lengthy placeholder recommendation-format templates in Steps 2-4, and an Overview that explains what enrichment modules are; these could be tightened without losing clarity.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, mostly executable guidance (analyzer.py template, pytest harness test, pyproject.toml, YARA rule, docker exec psql queries, curl health check, submit.sh commands), with minor gaps from TODOs and {placeholder} tokens in the templates.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Eight clearly sequenced steps with explicit approval gates, validation checkpoints (Step 7 verification checklist, Step 8 health/load/result checks), feedback loops ('re-run after the user fixes the issue', Troubleshooting section), and checklists for the complex process.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Good section structure with clear headers, but the ~650-line file is monolithic: large code/format templates that could live in separate reference files are inlined, and the only external references (DEVELOPMENT_GUIDE.md, test harness) are mentioned briefly rather than serving as a layered overview.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 clearly conveys what the skill does and occupies a distinct, low-conflict niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and leans on gate topics rather than enumerating every build action.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when creating or scaffolding a new Nemesis file enrichment module.'

Broaden trigger terms with synonyms users might say (e.g. 'enrichment module', 'file enrichment', 'Nemesis module').

Consider naming the remaining build actions (detection strategy, implementation, standalone testing) for fuller coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Nemesis file enrichment module') and several specific actions via the approval-gate topics ('output mode, library choice, sample files, and integration testing'), but the listed specifics focus on gate subjects rather than the full set of build actions (detection, implementation, standalone testing are folded into 'end-to-end'), leaving minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear ('Build a new Nemesis file enrichment module end-to-end') but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Uses natural domain terms a Nemesis user would say ('enrichment module', 'file enrichment', 'Nemesis', 'integration testing') with good coverage, though synonyms and file extensions are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a clear, narrow niche (Nemesis file enrichment modules) with distinct triggers, giving minimal conflict risk with other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (654 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: SpecterOps/Nemesis
Path: .agents/skills/enrichment-module-builder/SKILL.md
Commit: 3734b90

Reviewed: 10 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.