CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

lightning-factory-explainer

Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol — scalable Lightning onboarding using shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, MuSig2, and Taproot. No soft fork required.

48

Quality

52%

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/lightning-factory-explainer/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is lightning-factory-explainer in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body is well-structured with clear sections and clearly signaled references, but it is mostly descriptive: it defers all substantive guidance to external links and relies on generic boilerplate instructions, leaving it low on actionability and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Replace the generic 'Instructions' boilerplate with domain-specific, actionable steps or a concrete explanation workflow (e.g., how to walk through a Decker-Wattenhofer invalidation tree, with a small diagram or example).

Inline a few concrete, copy-paste-ready details (key parameters, an example MuSig2/Taproot script path, or a short worked example) instead of only linking to the external repo.

De-duplicate the topic list across Purpose and Key Topics, and remove concepts Claude already knows, to tighten conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and sectioned, but the same topic list is repeated across the description, Purpose, and Key Topics sections, and the 'Instructions' section is generic boilerplate ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides only high-level hints and external links rather than concrete, executable steps; the 'Instructions' are abstract directives with no code, commands, or specific procedures tied to the domain.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Instructions' offer a rough abstract three-step sequence (clarify -> apply -> provide) that is generic boilerplate, poorly defined for this domain, and lacks any validation checkpoints.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized with clear section headers and clearly signaled (external) references one level deep; the minor gap is that all detail is deferred to external URLs rather than bundled local reference files.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

65%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 scopes a distinct technical niche and uses natural domain terms, but lacks an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause and leans on a single action verb, limiting specificity and completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause to the description (e.g., 'Use when explaining Lightning channel factories, scalable Lightning onboarding, or the SuperScalar protocol') to lift completeness.

Vary the action verbs beyond 'Explain' (e.g., 'Explain... compare... diagram... evaluate trade-offs') to broaden specificity of capabilities.

Include common synonyms/variants (e.g., 'Layer 2', 'LN', 'channel factory') to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and many concrete subject areas (channel factories, SuperScalar, shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, MuSig2, Taproot) but relies on a single generic action verb ('Explain'), so action variety is thin rather than comprehensive.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' but no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance in the description itself, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural domain terms a user would actually say ('Bitcoin Lightning', 'Lightning channel factories', 'scalable onboarding', 'MuSig2', 'Taproot', 'SuperScalar'), giving good keyword coverage, though a few synonyms/variants are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a narrow, specific niche ('Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol') with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against unrelated skills.

5 / 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.

Validation15 / 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
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.