sdd-propose
Create a change proposal with intent, scope, and approach. Trigger: "propose", "propuesta", "proposal", "new change", "nuevo cambio", "sdd new", "sdd propose", "/sdd:new", "sdd:ff", "fast-forward", "fast forward". When triggered by "sdd:ff" or "fast-forward": after creating the proposal, AUTOMATICALLY continue by executing sdd-spec, sdd-design, and sdd-tasks in sequence (do NOT stop after the proposal).
86
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
89%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 excels at trigger term coverage and completeness, with explicit trigger clauses and bilingual support. The main weakness is the somewhat vague explanation of what 'intent, scope, and approach' actually entail - more concrete actions would help Claude understand the full capability. The fast-forward behavior documentation is a nice addition for workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Expand the 'what' portion to describe concrete actions beyond 'create' - e.g., 'analyzes requirements, defines implementation boundaries, documents technical approach'
Consider adding brief context about what SDD stands for or what type of changes this handles to improve specificity
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (change proposal) and mentions components (intent, scope, approach), but doesn't elaborate on what these mean or list comprehensive concrete actions beyond 'create'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (create a change proposal with intent, scope, and approach) and when (explicit 'Trigger:' clause with comprehensive list). Also includes conditional behavior for fast-forward mode. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of trigger terms including natural language ('propose', 'proposal', 'new change'), bilingual support ('propuesta', 'nuevo cambio'), and command variations ('sdd new', '/sdd:new', 'sdd:ff', 'fast-forward'). | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with specific 'sdd' prefixed commands and unique terminology like 'fast-forward' mode. The combination of proposal creation with the SDD workflow makes it unlikely to conflict with generic proposal or documentation skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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-structured skill with excellent actionability - the proposal template is comprehensive and immediately usable. The workflow is clear with good error recovery guidance. Main weakness is the inline template adds significant length, and some explanatory content (like the size guideline table appearing twice conceptually) could be trimmed for better token efficiency.
Suggestions
Consider moving the full proposal.md template to a separate reference file (e.g., PROPOSAL_TEMPLATE.md) and keeping only a condensed example in the main skill
Remove the size guideline table from the template since Claude can infer appropriate sizing - or move it to a shared reference
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy - the proposal.md template is comprehensive but the size guideline table and some explanatory text could be trimmed. The template itself is valuable but adds bulk. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Highly actionable with concrete templates, specific file paths, exact markdown structure to produce, and clear persistence commands for each mode. The proposal.md template is copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 4-step sequence (read specs → write proposal → persist → return summary) with explicit validation through error recovery table. Each step has mode-specific instructions and the error recovery section provides feedback loops for common failure scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References external shared files appropriately (persistence-contract.md, engram-convention.md, openspec-convention.md), but the main content is somewhat monolithic with the large proposal template inline. The template could potentially be a separate reference file. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.