conductor-validator

Validates Conductor project artifacts for completeness, consistency, and correctness. Use after setup, when diagnosing issues, or before implementation to verify project context.

1.39x

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.39x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

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

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

Quality

Content

40%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 structurally broken and largely boilerplate: malformed code fencing, auto-generated filler in the use-case sections, generic non-actionable Instructions, and a reference to a file that does not exist. The only useful part is the concrete marker-pattern reference near the end.

Suggestions

Fix the malformed markdown: open a fenced code block before the ls commands and remove the stray closing fence, or move the diagnostic commands into a proper '## Validation steps' sequence.

Replace the auto-generated 'Use this skill when' / 'Do not use this skill when' filler (which repeats 'check if conductor directory exists') with real trigger conditions tied to the Conductor artifacts.

Either create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md (and place it under references/) or remove the dangling reference, since no references directory currently exists.

Turn the generic Instructions ('Clarify goals...', 'Apply relevant best practices') into a concrete validation workflow with explicit checkpoints (check files exist -> parse tracks.md -> report missing artifacts).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short, but it wastes tokens on auto-generated boilerplate ('check if conductor directory exists' repeated in the Use/Do-not-use sections) and generic Instructions ('Clarify goals... Apply relevant best practices'), so it is mostly efficient but contains clear padding.	3 / 5
Actionability	It includes concrete executable shell commands (ls of conductor files) and concrete marker patterns, but the commands are presented with broken fencing and no surrounding workflow, and the Instructions are vague boilerplate, leaving guidance incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is no real sequenced workflow — the opening lines are loose ls commands with a stray closing fence, and the Instructions are circular ('Provide actionable steps and verification') with no validation checkpoints despite this being a validation skill.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body references 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' but no references/resources directory exists, so the reference is broken; structure is minimal and the single deferred reference is not actually loadable.	2 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 clear and reasonably well-structured, answering both what it does and when to use it with a specific niche. It is held back by a single generic action verb and trigger phrasing that is situational rather than tied to concrete user keywords.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Conductor project artifacts') and one concrete action ('Validates') with three quality dimensions (completeness, consistency, correctness), but offers only a single action rather than multiple concrete operations, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does and gives an explicit 'Use...' clause with three trigger scenarios, but the 'when' is situational rather than tied to concrete user-utterance trigger phrases, keeping it just below a 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Situational triggers ('after setup', 'when diagnosing issues', 'before implementation') are present, but it lacks the concrete nouns and synonyms a user would naturally say (e.g. file names like 'tracks.md' or terms like 'audit'), so coverage is partial.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Conductor project artifacts' is a fairly specific niche with distinct triggers, giving low conflict risk with unrelated skills, though 'validates artifacts' is generic enough to risk minor overlap with other validation/audit skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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/skills/conductor-validator/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 3 days 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.