CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

get-rep-call-feedback

Use when the user wants evidence-backed coaching for one rep's calls, especially by comparing the rep with peer examples to identify repeatable best practices, specific upgrade moments, and practical next-call language.

69

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, highly actionable coaching workflow with clear sequencing, validation/failure handling, and clean one-level reference navigation; the only meaningful weakness is verbosity from repeated conditional qualifiers.

Suggestions

Consolidate the recurring conditional hedges (e.g., "when those dimensions are visible," "unless asked otherwise") into a single scope-handling note to reduce token overhead.

Trim repeated qualifiers in the sampling and search bullets so each instruction states its default once with exceptions only where they change behavior.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows but is padded with repetitive conditional qualifiers ("when those dimensions are visible," recurring "unless asked otherwise"-style hedges) that could be tightened without losing meaning.

2 / 3

Actionability

Gives concrete, executable guidance throughout — sample-size floors ("at least 15 target calls"), date windows, per-call retention fields ("three to eight observed moments"), excerpt limits ("no more than 25 quoted words"), and a fully specified output template.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered sequence (steps 1–4) with explicit checkpoints and bounded fallbacks — "do not assume a target rep... before gathering deeper evidence," "make at most three narrow source reads," and a limited-memo path that names the shortfall and the next improving search.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview with a dedicated Reference Loading section pointing one level deep to four real, present bundle files (call-transcripts-connector-playbook.md, request-schema.yaml, source-priority.md, output-contract.md), each tied to a specific use-case.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

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, mostly specific description with an explicit Use-when trigger and a clear niche; its main weakness is trigger-term coverage, which favors internal coaching jargon over the plain phrasings users would actually say.

Suggestions

Add natural user phrasings such as "call feedback," "review my calls," or "rep coaching" alongside the coaching vocabulary so the trigger matches how users actually ask.

Replace or gloss internal jargon like "upgrade moments" and "evidence-backed coaching" with plain-language equivalents without losing specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "comparing the rep with peer examples," "identify repeatable best practices," "specific upgrade moments," and "practical next-call language" — rather than naming only a domain with partial actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what it does (compare a rep with peers to extract best practices and map upgrade moments) and when to use it via a clear "Use when the user wants..." trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Carries the natural trigger "coaching for one rep's calls" but leans on internal jargon ("evidence-backed coaching," "upgrade moments") and omits common user phrasings like "call feedback," "review my calls," or "rep coaching," so coverage of natural terms is incomplete.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche — evidence-backed coaching for one rep via peer comparison — with triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

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

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code
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.