CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

hr-pro

Professional, ethical HR partner for hiring, onboarding/offboarding, PTO and leave, performance, compliant policies, and employee relations.

Quality

71%

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/hr-pro/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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 delivers genuinely actionable HR guidance with a clear intake-to-deliverable workflow and strong compliance guardrails. Its weaknesses are circular filler sections, a triplicated legal disclaimer, and a broken, buried reference to a nonexistent playbook file.

Suggestions

Remove or replace the tautological 'Use this skill when'/'Do not use'/'Instructions' boilerplate (e.g., 'Working on hr pro tasks') with HR-specific triggers and real first steps.

Either create resources/implementation-playbook.md or delete the broken reference; if kept, move it to a clearly signaled 'References' section and move the detailed playbook templates into it.

Consolidate the legal disclaimer into one authoritative section (it currently appears three times: opening disclaimer, Operating Principle 6, and the final Guardrails).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The Core Playbooks are dense and substantive, but the circular boilerplate sections ("Working on hr pro tasks or workflows", "Needing guidance, best practices, or checklists for hr pro", "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs") add no information, and the legal disclaimer is repeated three times (opening disclaimer, Operating Principle 6, final Guardrails). This fits 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than anchor 2, since padding is confined to the margins of an otherwise lean body.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance is pervasive: "ask up to 3 targeted questions max", "8-12 job-related questions", "1-5 anchors per competency", "30/60/90 plan", explicit placeholders ({{CompanyName}}, {{Jurisdiction}}), and a fixed 6-part deliverable format. Held below anchor 5 because templates and snippets are described rather than shown, and the file that would hold the detailed examples does not exist.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The intake sequence is explicit (jurisdiction, union presence, company profile, employment types) and the deliverable format imposes a clear numbered output order, with counsel-escalation checkpoints well marked on high-risk actions. This matches 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present, minor validation gaps' — there is no explicit output-verification step, keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized, but the body's only reference ("open resources/implementation-playbook.md") is buried in boilerplate and points to a file that does not exist, and 100+ lines of playbook detail that could partly live in reference files are inlined. This matches anchor 3 ('some structure, references present but not clearly signaled, content that should be separate is inline') rather than anchor 2, since the document has substantial clear structure.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 delimits the HR domain with strong natural trigger terms, but omits any 'Use when...' trigger clause, which both caps completeness and slightly weakens its usability for skill selection. Adding an explicit usage clause with a couple more synonyms (recruiting, termination) would lift it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when drafting job descriptions, PTO or leave policies, onboarding plans, performance reviews/PIPs, or handling employee relations issues.'

Lead with concrete action verbs (drafts, generates, reviews) instead of only naming domains, so capabilities read as deliverables rather than topic areas.

Add common synonyms like 'recruiting', 'termination', and 'performance reviews' to broaden natural trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates six concrete capability areas ("hiring, onboarding/offboarding, PTO and leave, performance, compliant policies, and employee relations"), matching the 'several specific actions, minor gaps' anchor. It falls short of anchor 5 because it names domains with no concrete action verbs (e.g., 'draft', 'generate', 'review') and above anchor 3 because coverage goes well beyond 1-2 items.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear via the enumerated HR domains, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It is above anchor 2 because the 'what' is concrete, not vague, and below anchor 4 which requires an explicit 'when'.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "hiring", "onboarding", "PTO and leave", "performance", and "employee relations" are natural terms users would say when they need this skill, matching 'good keyword coverage, a few natural terms missing'. Missing synonyms such as 'recruiting', 'termination', 'exit interviews', and 'performance reviews' keep it below the comprehensive anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Distinctly HR triggers ("PTO", "onboarding", "employee relations") give a mostly distinct niche with minor overlap risk, matching anchor 4. 'compliant policies' creates some adjacency with legal/policy-drafting skills, so anchor 5's 'minimal conflict risk' is not fully met.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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/hr-pro/SKILL.md

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.