sdd-verify
Validate that implementation matches specs, design, and tasks. Trigger: "verify", "verificar", "validate", "check implementation", "quality gate", "sdd verify", "revisar cambio", "/sdd:verify".
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
82%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 has strong trigger term coverage with both English and Spanish variants, and explicitly addresses when to use the skill. However, it lacks specificity about what concrete validation actions are performed, and some generic trigger terms could cause conflicts with other validation-related skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'compares code against SDD requirements, verifies API contracts match design, checks task completion criteria'
Consider narrowing generic triggers or adding context to reduce conflict risk with other validation/testing skills
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (implementation validation against specs/design/tasks) but lacks concrete actions. 'Validate that implementation matches' is somewhat specific but doesn't list what validation entails (e.g., compare code to requirements, check test coverage, verify API contracts). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Validate that implementation matches specs, design, and tasks') and when (explicit 'Trigger:' clause with multiple trigger terms). The explicit trigger guidance satisfies the completeness requirement. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including 'verify', 'validate', 'check implementation', 'quality gate', plus Spanish variants 'verificar', 'revisar cambio', and a command-style trigger '/sdd:verify'. These are terms users would naturally say. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The 'sdd verify' and '/sdd:verify' triggers create some distinctiveness, but generic terms like 'verify', 'validate', and 'check implementation' could overlap with testing, code review, or other validation-related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%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 verification skill with excellent actionability and workflow clarity. The step-by-step process with explicit validation checkpoints, compliance matrices, and error recovery guidance makes it highly executable. Minor verbosity in the output templates and some unnecessary framing language prevent a perfect conciseness score.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy (e.g., the detailed output template could be more condensed, and some explanations like 'You are the quality gate' are unnecessary for Claude). The structured tables and checklists are appropriate but verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides highly concrete, executable guidance with specific file paths to check, exact command detection logic, clear classification criteria (COMPLIANT/PARTIAL/NOT COMPLIANT), and detailed output templates. The pseudocode-style decision trees are actionable and unambiguous. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-step workflow with clear sequencing (Steps 1-7), explicit validation checkpoints (Step 2b automated checks before compliance assessment), and comprehensive error recovery table. The feedback loop for re-verification is documented. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Appropriately references external shared files (persistence-contract.md, engram-convention.md, openspec-convention.md) for detailed conventions while keeping the core verification logic self-contained. References are one level deep and clearly signaled. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.