CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

interview-me

Extracts what the user actually wants instead of what they think they should want. Achieves this through one-question-at-a-time interview until ~95% confidence about the underlying intent. Use when an ask is underspecified ("build me X" without "for whom" or "why now"), when the user explicitly invokes ("interview me", "grill me", "are we sure?", "stress-test my thinking"), or when you catch yourself silently filling in ambiguous requirements before any plan, spec, or code exists.

72

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, highly actionable instruction skill with a clear sequenced workflow, explicit stop condition, feedback loops, and a verification checklist. Its one weakness is conciseness — several rationale and ancillary sections could be trimmed to respect the token budget.

Suggestions

Tighten or condense the 'Why one at a time, not a batch' and 'Why attach a guess' rationale lists into one or two lines each; the core rule is already implied by the format.

Consider trimming the 'Common Rationalizations' table and 'Interaction with Other Skills' to the two or three highest-value entries, or moving them behind a single reference file to reduce inline tokens.

Merge overlapping items between 'Red Flags' and 'Verification' so each list covers distinct ground and the skill stays lean.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is rich and accurate but verbose — extended rationale blocks ('Why one at a time, not a batch', 'Why attach a guess'), a Common Rationalizations table, Red Flags, and an Interaction-with-Other-Skills section that could be tightened without losing the core guidance, matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened'.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready templates (HYPOTHESIS/CONFIDENCE, Q/GUESS, the six-line restate), exact scripts to use on 'whatever you think' / 'sounds good', and a fully worked before-and-after example — fully actionable instruction guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with an explicit, checkable stop condition ('Can I predict the user's reaction to the next three questions?'), feedback loops (fold corrections and restate, loop until explicit yes), and a final verification checklist — matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops; checklists' anchor.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist in references/scripts/assets, and the skill is a self-contained, cohesive interview process; content is appropriately kept in one well-organized file with clearly labeled sections and no nested references, so organization rather than file-splitting earns the top score.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

90%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, third-person description that clearly states both capability and explicit trigger conditions with natural user-language invocations. The only mild weakness is specificity, since it describes one method rather than enumerating several concrete actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the concrete mechanism ('one-question-at-a-time interview until ~95% confidence about the underlying intent') and the outcome, but offers a single method rather than a list of multiple specific actions, matching the 'names domain and some actions, not comprehensive' anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ('Extracts what the user actually wants... one-question-at-a-time interview until ~95% confidence') and when ('Use when an ask is underspecified... when the user explicitly invokes... when you catch yourself silently filling in ambiguous requirements'), with explicit triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes natural invocations a user would actually say — 'interview me', 'grill me', 'are we sure?', 'stress-test my thinking' — plus the underspecified-ask pattern 'build me X', giving good coverage of natural trigger terms.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The invocation triggers ('interview me', 'grill me', 'stress-test my thinking') carve a clear niche and the description positions the skill before sibling Define-phase skills, making conflict with other skills unlikely.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
addyosmani/agent-skills
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.