omc-plan
Strategic planning with optional interview workflow
50
38%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/plan/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically underdeveloped and would perform poorly in skill selection scenarios. It lacks concrete actions, natural trigger terms, explicit usage guidance, and distinctive characteristics that would help Claude choose it appropriately from a pool of skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Creates strategic roadmaps, conducts stakeholder interviews, synthesizes findings into action plans')
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks for strategic planning, roadmap creation, stakeholder analysis, or needs to conduct discovery interviews')
Clarify the domain or context to make it distinctive (e.g., 'product strategy', 'organizational planning', 'project discovery') to reduce conflict with other planning-related skills
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language ('strategic planning') without listing any concrete actions. It doesn't specify what kind of planning, what outputs are produced, or what the 'interview workflow' actually involves. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description only vaguely hints at 'what' (strategic planning) and completely lacks any 'when' guidance. There is no 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains only generic terms ('strategic planning', 'interview workflow') that are not natural keywords users would say. Missing specific trigger terms like 'roadmap', 'strategy document', 'stakeholder interviews', or domain-specific vocabulary. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Strategic planning' is extremely generic and could conflict with project management, business analysis, product planning, or any number of planning-related skills. The 'interview workflow' mention is too vague to create distinctiveness. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-crafted, highly actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and explicit validation checkpoints. The consensus mode RALPLAN-DR workflow is thoroughly documented with clear iteration limits and approval gates. The main weakness is length—the skill could benefit from splitting detailed consensus mode specifications into a separate reference file to improve token efficiency.
Suggestions
Extract the detailed RALPLAN-DR consensus mode specification (steps 1-9) into a separate CONSENSUS.md reference file, keeping only a summary in the main skill
Remove redundant information between steps 7 and 9 (approval options are listed twice with similar detail)
Consolidate the repeated consensus mode tool usage notes that appear in both <Tool_Usage> and <Steps> sections
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive but includes some redundancy (e.g., step 9 repeats information from step 7, tool usage section repeats consensus mode details). Some sections could be tightened, though it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Highly actionable with specific triggers, concrete tool invocations (Task, Skill, AskUserQuestion), exact file paths (.omc/plans/), and clear decision tables. The examples show exact patterns to follow and avoid. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-step workflow with explicit sequencing, validation checkpoints (Critic approval gates), iteration limits (max 5), and clear feedback loops. The consensus mode steps are numbered with explicit dependencies (wait for step 3 before step 4). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-structured with clear sections (Purpose, Steps, Tool_Usage, Examples, Advanced), but the document is quite long and monolithic. The Advanced section helps, but some content (like the full consensus mode details) could be split into separate reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode
- Commit
48ffaac
- 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.