CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

spec-workflow

Use when medium-to-large changes need explicit requirements, technical design, and task planning before implementation, especially for multi-module work, unclear acceptance criteria, or architecture-heavy requests.

63

Quality

75%

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 ./config/.claude/skills/spec-workflow/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is spec-workflow in TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit

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.

A well-structured, actionable process skill with a clear phased workflow and confirmation gates. The main weakness is redundancy across three overlapping when-to-use sections, which hurts conciseness and organization.

Suggestions

Consolidate the redundant trigger guidance in "Use this first when", "When to use this skill", and "Decision rule" into a single section to remove restated use/skip logic and tighten conciseness.

Add one short full example requirements.md (or a condensed EARS acceptance-criteria block) to lift actionability from mostly-executable to copy-paste ready.

Consider an explicit verify/retry loop note for the Execution phase (e.g., re-confirm with the user when a task uncovers a missing requirement) to strengthen workflow_clarity feedback loops.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient bullet-style prose that assumes Claude's competence and avoids basic-concept padding, but the trigger/skip logic is restated across three overlapping sections ("Use this first when", "When to use this skill", "Decision rule") that could be consolidated.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, copy-pasteable guidance — file paths like specs/<spec_name>/requirements.md, an EARS template with a worked example, and a markdown task format — with only minor gaps such as no full sample requirements.md.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-phase sequence (Requirements → Design → Tasks → Execution) with explicit confirmation gates between phases, a minimal checklist, and gotchas; lacks explicit error-recovery feedback loops, though the skill is not destructive/batch so the workflow-clarity cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clear headed sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled sibling-skill references (../ui-design/SKILL.md, ../data-model-creation/SKILL.md) and no bundle files to mismanage; the recurring trigger-section redundancy is a minor organization gap.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong, third-person description that clearly states both capability and trigger conditions with concrete phrases, hitting the explicit "Use when" guidance. Minor room to improve keyword synonyms and artifact specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and three concrete actions — "explicit requirements, technical design, and task planning" — but does not enumerate the output artifacts (requirements.md/design.md/tasks.md), leaving minor coverage gaps relative to the comprehensive anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (requirements, technical design, task planning before implementation) and when, with a "Use when..." clause listing three concrete trigger conditions; matches the anchor for clearly answering both with concrete triggers.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-keyword coverage ("medium-to-large changes", "multi-module work", "architecture-heavy requests", "acceptance criteria") that users would plausibly say, though common synonyms like "spec" or "design doc" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Mostly distinct niche (spec-driven planning) with specific triggers, but the general software-engineering process language (requirements/design/planning) creates minor overlap risk with adjacent planning or design skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit
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.