CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

conductor-setup

Configure a Rails project to work with Conductor (parallel coding agents)

56

Quality

64%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

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

The canonical home for this skill is conductor-setup in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body is an efficient, mostly copy-paste-ready setup recipe with a clear sequence and an explicit verification section, with only minor gaps around config-edit search/replace patterns and error-recovery feedback loops.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with executable bash/json/ruby blocks and no padding of concepts Claude already knows; the only redundancy is the 'Implementation Notes' restating the per-file 'if it doesn't already exist' guards, which is a minor trim opportunity rather than full efficiency.

4 / 5

Actionability

File-creation blocks are copy-paste ready with chmod commands, but the Rails config updates instruct Claude to locate existing Redis config and swap in ENV.fetch snippets without an explicit search/replace pattern, leaving a minor gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered creation sequence is followed by a Verification section (confirm files, run script/server, check ENV['REDIS_URL']), so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply; the feedback loop on a failed server start is only implied, preventing a 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single SKILL.md with well-labeled sections (# What to Create, Implementation Notes, Verification) and no nested references is well organized; at ~100 lines with four inlined Rails-config variations it is slightly heavier than ideal for SKILL.md, so it sits just below the lean one-level-deep ideal.

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 is concise and names a specific, distinctive integration, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance and offers only a single generic action, leaving the 'when' half of completeness unaddressed.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when setting up or onboarding a Rails project to Conductor, parallel coding agents, or worktree-based agent workflows.'

Replace the single generic verb 'Configure' with 2-3 concrete actions (e.g. 'Create conductor.json, the setup script, and a per-workspace server script') to lift specificity.

Include natural synonyms users might say ('Conductor setup', 'Rails worktree agents', 'parallel agents') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names a concrete domain ('Rails project' + 'Conductor') and one action ('Configure'), but the action is generic and coverage is not comprehensive, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the minimal/generic anchor at 2.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does ('Configure a Rails project to work with Conductor') but lacks any 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the rubric a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like 'Rails project', 'Conductor', and 'parallel coding agents' are present, but coverage is limited to the one tool name with no synonyms or common variations, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The named Mac app 'Conductor' plus 'Rails project' carve a clear niche with low conflict risk; the generic parenthetical '(parallel coding agents)' creates only minor overlap with related agent-tooling skills, landing between the 3 and 5 anchors.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-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.