CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

incident-response-smart-fix

[Extended thinking: This workflow implements a sophisticated debugging and resolution pipeline that leverages AI-assisted debugging tools and observability platforms to systematically diagnose and res

24

Quality

14%

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 ./skills/incident-response-smart-fix/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

3%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 skill is essentially empty of actionable content. The extended thinking block contains an elaborate description of a multi-phase debugging pipeline, but none of it is translated into actual instructions. The four instruction bullets are generic platitudes that provide no concrete guidance on multi-agent orchestration, debugging workflows, or issue resolution. The referenced resource file doesn't exist in the bundle.

Suggestions

Replace the extended thinking block with actual structured workflow steps: define the four phases (Issue Analysis, Root Cause Investigation, Fix Implementation, Verification) as concrete numbered steps with specific commands, tool invocations, and validation checkpoints.

Add concrete, executable examples showing how to orchestrate agents—e.g., specific agent invocation syntax, context-passing patterns, and example inputs/outputs for each phase.

Include validation and feedback loops: e.g., 'Run regression suite after fix → if failures, return to Root Cause Investigation → re-analyze with new context'.

Either create the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` with detailed patterns and examples, or inline the essential content directly in the skill body.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The massive extended thinking block is pure padding that explains concepts Claude already knows. The actual instructions are four bullet points of generic advice ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs') that could apply to literally any skill. The content is severely verbose where it shouldn't be (extended thinking) and vacuous where it should be substantive (instructions).

1 / 5

Actionability

The instructions are entirely vague and abstract: 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes' and 'Provide actionable steps and verification' are meta-instructions with zero concrete guidance. There are no commands, no code, no specific tools to invoke, no examples of agent orchestration, no actual debugging steps—nothing executable whatsoever.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Despite the extended thinking block describing a four-phase process, none of that is reflected in the actual skill instructions. The body contains no sequenced steps, no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops. The four bullet points are unordered generic platitudes, not a workflow. The elaborate pipeline described in the extended thinking block is never operationalized.

1 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references `resources/implementation-playbook.md` but no bundle files exist, making the reference unverifiable and potentially broken. The structure has a basic section layout (when to use, instructions, resources) but the actual content that should be in the body is instead dumped into an extended thinking block, and the referenced file doesn't exist.

2 / 5

Total

5

/

20

Passed

Description

25%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 truncated and incomplete, providing only a vague, jargon-heavy overview of a debugging pipeline without concrete actions, trigger terms, or 'when to use' guidance. It reads more like an internal design note (starting with '[Extended thinking:') than a functional skill description, making it poorly suited for skill selection among competing options.

Suggestions

Complete the description and remove the '[Extended thinking:' prefix — use third-person declarative voice describing concrete actions (e.g., 'Analyzes error logs, traces stack traces, queries observability platforms to diagnose production issues').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms such as 'debug,' 'fix bug,' 'error,' 'crash,' 'production issue,' 'logs,' 'stack trace,' or specific tool/platform names.

Narrow the scope to distinguish this skill from generic debugging skills — specify which observability platforms, languages, or environments it targets to reduce conflict risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description mentions 'debugging and resolution pipeline' and references 'AI-assisted debugging tools and observability platforms,' but these are vague domain references without concrete actions like 'analyze logs,' 'set breakpoints,' or 'trace errors.' It names the domain but actions are minimal or generic.

2 / 5

Completeness

The description appears truncated and only provides a vague 'what' (debugging and resolution pipeline). There is no 'when' clause or trigger guidance at all. The truncation means it fails to deliver complete information on either dimension.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains some relevant terms like 'debugging,' 'resolution,' and 'observability platforms,' but these are fairly generic and technical. Missing natural user phrases like 'fix bug,' 'error,' 'crash,' 'logs,' 'stack trace,' or specific tool names users would mention.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is very broad — 'debugging and resolution' could overlap with virtually any debugging, troubleshooting, or error-handling skill. The mention of 'observability platforms' adds slight specificity but not enough to clearly distinguish it from other debugging-related skills.

2 / 5

Total

8

/

20

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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
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.