Name: blueprint
Rating: 56.00000000000001 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

blueprint

Turn a one-line objective into a step-by-step construction plan any coding agent can execute cold. Each step has a self-contained context brief — a fresh agent in a new session can pick up any step without reading prior steps.

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/blueprint/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is blueprint in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

75%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 content is a well-structured, mostly lean instruction-only skill body with concrete invocation guidance and a clear sequenced workflow gated by an adversarial review step. Its main weaknesses are the implicit review-remediation loop and a referenced 'structured template' that is not bundled or shown.

Suggestions

Add an explicit post-review remediation loop (e.g., 'If review finds issues, revise affected steps and re-run review until it passes') to reach anchor 5 for workflow clarity.

Either inline the structured plan template or link to it as a bundled reference file so the Draft step is fully actionable.

De-duplicate the tagline between the Overview and the Best-Practices/When-to-Use multi-PR guidance to tighten conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the opening tagline is repeated in Overview and the When-to-Use/Best-Practices multi-PR guidance overlaps, leaving minor trim opportunities that keep it just below anchor 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	It provides concrete invocation syntax, a specific 5-step process (model tiers, branch workflow, CI policy, rollback), and install commands, but the 'structured template' referenced in Draft is never shown or bundled, a minor gap below fully copy-paste-ready anchor 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear Research->Design->Draft->Review->Register sequence with an explicit adversarial-review checkpoint is present, but what to do when review surfaces issues (validate->fix->retry) is left implicit, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-organized into clear sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled external references (GitHub repo, example plan files); the only organization gap is the referenced 'structured template' not existing as an actual file, keeping it below anchor 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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 clearly communicates what the skill does and carves out a distinct cold-start planning niche, but it lacks an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause and relies on a few domain terms without common user phrasings or synonyms. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases would raise completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers (e.g., 'Use when a task spans multiple PRs/sessions and steps must run in fresh agent sessions').

Add natural synonyms users actually say ('break this into steps', 'plan this out', 'multi-session project') to broaden trigger coverage.

List 2-3 more specific concrete actions (e.g., 'detects parallel steps, assigns model tiers, delegates adversarial review') to lift specificity above anchor 3.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the planning domain and 1-2 concrete actions ('Turn a one-line objective into a step-by-step construction plan', 'self-contained context brief') but does not list multiple specific actions, matching the anchor that caps at 3.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated but there is no 'Use when...' trigger clause in the description itself, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant terms ('one-line objective', 'step-by-step construction plan', 'coding agent') are present but common natural phrasings a user would say ('break this into steps', 'plan this out') and synonyms are missing, fitting anchor 3.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The cold-start, self-contained-context-brief niche is mostly distinct from other skills with only minor overlap risk against general planning skills, matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/blueprint/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 24 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.