explain-like-socrates

Explains concepts using Socratic-style dialogue. Use when the user asks to explain, teach or help understand a concept like socrates.

Quality

53%

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 ./skills/explain-like-socrates/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

52%Scale 1-5

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

This is a moderately well-structured instruction-only skill that provides a clear workflow for Socratic-style explanations, but suffers from verbosity and redundancy. The same core ideas (be conversational, don't lecture, guide through reasoning) are repeated across multiple sections. The skill would benefit from consolidation of overlapping sections and the addition of a complete example showing an input question and full Socratic response.

Suggestions

Consolidate redundant guidance: the DO/DO NOT list, TONE section, and multiple reminders to 'not lecture' all say the same thing—merge into one concise section.

Add one complete example showing a user question (e.g., 'Explain recursion like Socrates') and a full model response demonstrating all 5 steps, which would dramatically improve actionability.

Merge the overlapping REFLECTION and TERMINATION sections into a single 'Closing' section.

Remove the 'When to Use / Do NOT Use' section since this information belongs in the frontmatter description, not the body content.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is noticeably verbose for an instruction-only skill. It over-explains concepts Claude already understands (what Socratic dialogue is, what a vending machine analogy looks like), repeats the same guidance multiple times (e.g., 'conversational not lecture' appears in multiple sections), and includes unnecessary sections like 'When to Use' that largely restate the frontmatter description. The 'DO NOT' lists and tone guidance are redundant with each other.	2 / 5
Actionability	The skill provides some concrete guidance with example phrases and a structured response pattern, but much of it remains abstract direction ('reason conversationally', 'build the idea step-by-step'). The examples are illustrative snippets rather than complete, executable response templates. A full example input/output showing a complete Socratic explanation would significantly improve actionability.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 5-step response structure (Curiosity Opening → Guided Reasoning → Single Analogy → Clarification → Reflection) provides a clear sequence for a non-destructive, conversational skill. It includes handling for edge cases (misconceptions, user insistence on direct answers, confusion). Minor gap: the relationship between steps could be tighter, and the termination/reflection sections overlap.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	For a standalone skill with no bundle files, the content is reasonably well-structured with clear section headers and logical organization. The content length (~100 lines) is appropriate for a single file. Minor issue: some sections (Reflection, Termination) overlap and could be consolidated, and the content could benefit from slightly tighter organization.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 establishes a clear pedagogical approach (Socratic dialogue) and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause, which is good. However, it lacks specificity about what the Socratic method entails in practice and uses overly broad trigger terms ('explain', 'teach') that could conflict with general explanation skills. The description would benefit from more concrete actions and additional natural trigger terms.

Suggestions

Add specific concrete actions that describe the Socratic method, e.g., 'Guides understanding through probing questions, counterexamples, and step-by-step reasoning rather than direct answers.'

Expand trigger terms to include natural synonyms like 'Socratic method', 'guided questioning', 'walk me through step by step', 'help me figure it out myself'.

Narrow the 'Use when' clause to reduce conflict risk, e.g., 'Use when the user explicitly requests Socratic dialogue, guided questioning, or wants to learn through discovery rather than direct explanation.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (Socratic-style dialogue) and one generic action (explains concepts), but provides no concrete details about what specific actions or techniques are involved—e.g., asking probing questions, guiding through counterexamples, building on prior knowledge.	2 / 5
Completeness	Has both a 'what' (explains concepts using Socratic-style dialogue) and a 'when' (Use when the user asks to explain, teach or help understand a concept like socrates). The 'when' clause is present and explicit, though the 'what' is thin and the 'when' could be more specific about trigger scenarios.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant trigger terms like 'explain', 'teach', 'help understand', and 'socrates', but misses natural variations users might say such as 'Socratic method', 'guided questioning', 'walk me through', 'break down', or 'ELI5'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Socratic method is a somewhat specific niche, but 'explains concepts' and 'teach' are very broad triggers that could easily overlap with any general explanation or tutoring skill. The 'like socrates' qualifier helps but is an unusual phrasing users may not use.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

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

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: skills/explain-like-socrates/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.