CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

grilling

Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases.

61

Quality

72%

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 ./.agents/skills/grilling/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 grilling methodology itself is excellent — lean, concrete, and sequenced as a rounds/frontier interview process with a copy-paste round format. The score is dragged down by the telemetry-reporting block that consumes about half the body without serving the task, and by the absence of any section headers to organize what is there.

Suggestions

Move the skillpack activation-reporting details (HTTP-client examples, identity-resolution ladder) out of the SKILL.md body into a separate reference file, keeping only the one-line requirement inline.

Add section headers (e.g. '## Process', '## Round format', '## Facts vs decisions') so the workflow, template, and mechanics are navigable at a glance.

Add brief guidance for handling a stalled round — e.g. what to do when the user answers ambiguously or refuses a question — to close the workflow's error-recovery gap.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~23 lines of grilling instructions are lean and assume Claude's competence ("Finding facts is your job, never the user's"), but roughly half the body is telemetry-reporting mechanics — two HTTP-client examples and a five-step identity-resolution ladder — that earn no tokens for the skill's actual task. That substantial padding fits the 'mostly efficient but includes unnecessary explanation' anchor better than the 'minor instances' of the 4 anchor.

3 / 5

Actionability

The round-format template (numbered questions with titles, bodies, and '➡️ recommended answer' lines) is copy-paste ready, and concrete rules cover fact-finding, delegation, and the completion condition. For an instruction-only skill this is fully executable guidance covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is explicit — state the branch and completion condition, map the design tree, ask the frontier in rounds, wait for answers, recompute, stop when settled, summarize and return — and waiting for user answers acts as a checkpoint. It falls short of the 5 anchor only because there is no error-recovery guidance for stalled or ambiguous rounds.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is short and single-purpose with no bundle files, so no external references are needed and content placement is fine. However the body has no section headers at all — the interview process, the format template, and the telemetry mechanics run together — which is a minor organization gap against the well-organized-sections standard.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

A compact description with an explicit 'Use when' clause and a genuinely distinctive 'grill' trigger. Its main weakness is that the 'what' states only one action — grilling — without conveying the structured-interview mechanics the skill actually performs.

Suggestions

Enumerate the concrete behaviors in the 'what' half, e.g. 'Interview the user in rounds of numbered questions with recommended answers, mapping decisions as a dependency tree' instead of the single 'grill relentlessly' action.

Add natural trigger synonyms users might say, such as 'challenge my plan', 'poke holes in this idea', or 'play devil's advocate', to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea" names the domain and a single action, matching the 1-2-concrete-actions level. It does not list the skill's actual behaviors (structured interview rounds, design-tree mapping, recommended answers), so it falls short of the several-specific-actions anchor.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are present and the 'when' is explicit ("Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases"), but the 'what' is one generic action rather than a concrete enumeration of what the skill does. It sits between the 4 anchor (when/what present, one could be stronger) and the 5 anchor (fully concrete both ways).

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"stress-test their thinking" and "'grill' trigger phrases" are natural terms users would say, giving good keyword coverage. Common variations like "challenge my plan", "poke holes in this", or "devil's advocate" are missing, keeping it below the comprehensive-synonyms anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Grill" is a distinctive, unusual trigger that carves a clear niche, and "plan, decision, or idea" scopes it. Minor overlap risk remains with general plan-review or Socratic-questioning skills via "stress-test their thinking".

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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
The-Vibe-Company/companion
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.