CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

ralplan

Consensus planning entrypoint that auto-gates vague ralph/autopilot/team requests before execution

Quality

68%

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 ./skills/ralplan/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body is a strong operational document: the consensus workflow is precisely sequenced with real validation and feedback loops, and gate behavior is driven by concrete examples and tables. Its weaknesses are redundancy — the reviewer independence rule is stated four times — and progressive-disclosure gaps: a dangling reference to a nonexistent docs file and unsplit inlined detail.

Suggestions

State the Architect/Critic independence and parallel-vs-sequential rule once (e.g., in the step-4 blockquote) and delete the repeated MUST clauses from steps 3, 5a, and the closing 'Important' note, cutting noticeable token waste.

Remove the reference to docs/company-context-interface.md or ship that file — the bundle contains no other files, so the pointer is a dead end for anyone following it.

Move the RALPLAN-DR summary spec and the Pre-Execution Gate signal tables into a references file (e.g. references/gate-signals.md), keeping SKILL.md a lean overview; also delete the empty '## Behavior' heading or give it content.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly dense, necessary instruction with no padding explaining known concepts, but the Architect/Critic independence and parallel-vs-sequential rule is restated four times (steps 3, 4, the step-4 blockquote, and the closing 'Important' note), which could be consolidated into one place.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete invocation commands, per-flag semantics with defaults and fallback behavior, verbatim good/bad gate examples, a signal table, an end-to-end example, and a troubleshooting table make this mostly executable. Minor gaps: the final plan's output format and Planner/Architect/Critic invocation mechanics are delegated to the Plan skill's external docs.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The consensus loop is numbered 0-8 with explicit validation checkpoints (Critic APPROVE/ITERATE/REJECT verdicts), a bounded feedback loop (max 5 iterations with a present-best-version fallback), and a hard planning/execution boundary with pending-approval gating — matching the top anchor of clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery loops.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized and easy to navigate, but the body references docs/company-context-interface.md, which does not exist in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories), and a stray empty '## Behavior' heading sits above 'Planning/Execution Boundary'. The inlined RALPLAN-DR spec and gate rules could live in a reference file for a 135-line single-file skill.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 identifies a concrete, fairly distinctive behavior (auto-gating vague ralph/autopilot/team requests into consensus planning) but reads like an internal routing note rather than a trigger-oriented description. It lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and natural trigger synonyms, capping completeness and trigger term quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user issues a vague ralph/autopilot/team request (no file paths, symbols, issue numbers, or numbered steps) or asks for consensus planning before execution.'

List the skill's concrete actions so the 'what' is comprehensive, e.g. 'Drafts a consensus plan via Planner/Architect/Critic loop, redirects vague execution requests into planning, and marks plans pending approval.'

Include natural trigger synonyms users would say — 'plan', 'consensus', 'spec out', 'scope it' — alongside the execution skill names.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Consensus planning') plus one concrete action ('auto-gates vague ralph/autopilot/team requests before execution'), but stops short of listing what the skill actually does (drafting plans, Planner/Architect/Critic loop, redirecting to execution).

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (gating plus consensus planning entrypoint), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance; 'before execution' only weakly implies when, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes terms users literally type ('ralph', 'autopilot', 'team') and 'planning', but misses common natural variations such as 'plan', 'spec', 'PRD', or 'scope it first' that a user would say when needing this skill.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Gating vague execution-skill requests is a specific niche with concrete skill names as triggers, making it mostly distinct; minor overlap risk remains with the 'plan' skill it aliases.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode

Path

skills/ralplan/SKILL.md

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.