CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

grilling

Grill the user relentlessly about a plan or decision. Trigger: stress-test my thinking, grill.

66

Quality

83%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

100%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 exemplary: a lean, novel, fully executable protocol with an explicit round template, dependency-ordered sequencing, and explicit wait/confirm checkpoints. It assumes Claude's intelligence throughout and adds only what Claude could not invent itself.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

In ~30 lines it defines only novel concepts (design tree, frontier, rounds) that Claude could not derive itself, includes zero padding or explanations of known concepts, and every sentence carries a new operational rule — 'Lean and efficient; every token earns its place'.

5 / 5

Actionability

The round-format template ('❓ **Q1** - **<question title>**... ➡️ <your recommended answer>') is copy-paste ready, and the rules are fully executable: ask the whole frontier in one round, number each question with a recommendation, dispatch sub-agents for facts, offer visual-thinking at 3+ open decisions. Nothing is left as vague direction.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The multi-step process is explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints: ask frontier → 'wait for the user's answers before the next round' → recompute frontier → 'The session is done when the frontier is empty' → 'Do not act on it until the user confirms'. The gating on user answers and final confirmation are exactly the explicit checkpoints the top anchor requires, and no destructive/batch cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines and single-purpose with no bundle files, so per the simple-skill note it qualifies for a 5: the body is cleanly organized (tree model → rounds → format template → tree dynamics → visual-thinking handoff → fact-finding → termination), and the single external mention ('visual-thinking' skill) is clearly signaled as an optional offer, not a buried reference.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

57%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 answers both what and when with explicit trigger phrases and is appropriately concise, but it is thin: one generic action verb and only two trigger terms with no synonyms. It reads as a minimum-viable description rather than a comprehensive one.

Suggestions

Enumerate the concrete behaviors involved, e.g. 'Interview the user in rounds, map decisions as a dependency tree, and recommend an answer for every question' — this would lift specificity from 'grill' alone.

Broaden the trigger list with natural variations users would actually say: 'poke holes in my plan', 'challenge my assumptions', 'red-team my idea', 'interrogate my decision', 'stress-test my plan'.

State when NOT to use it (e.g. not for executing a settled plan) to sharpen distinctiveness against planning and review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The phrase 'Grill the user relentlessly about a plan or decision' names the domain (interrogating a plan/decision) but offers only one generic action with no concrete behaviors enumerated, matching the 'actions are minimal or generic' anchor rather than the 1-2 concrete actions of a 3.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: the 'what' ('Grill the user relentlessly about a plan or decision') and an explicit 'when' clause ('Trigger: stress-test my thinking, grill'), but the trigger guidance is terse and narrow where a 5 demands concrete, comprehensive trigger phrases.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Trigger: stress-test my thinking, grill' provides two natural phrases, but common variations users would say ('poke holes in my plan', 'challenge my decisions', 'red-team', 'interrogate my assumptions') are missing, matching 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Grill' and 'stress-test my thinking' carve a distinct interrogation niche with minimal overlap risk, though the thin trigger set leaves minor overlap with general planning/review skills, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

YoizenSA/dev-ai-workflow

Path

ywai/skills/grilling/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.