CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tdd-orchestrator

Master TDD orchestrator specializing in red-green-refactor discipline, multi-agent workflow coordination, and comprehensive test-driven development practices.

37

Quality

35%

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/tdd-orchestrator/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

17%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 a generic, padded persona description with no executable guidance, no real workflow checkpoints, and a broken reference to a missing bundle file. It reads as a templated community skill rather than operational instruction.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract capability/trait/knowledge bullet lists with a concrete red-green-refactor workflow: e.g., 1) write a failing test, 2) run it to confirm red, 3) implement minimum code, 4) run to confirm green, 5) refactor, 6) re-run — with actual test commands.

Add executable examples for at least one framework (e.g., a pytest or Jest failing-then-passing test snippet) so the guidance is copy-paste ready.

Fix progressive disclosure: either create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md (and move the capability catalog there) or remove the dead link and split the inlined material into clearly signaled one-level-deep reference files.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is a long wall of capability bullet lists, behavioral traits, and a knowledge base that largely enumerate TDD concepts Claude already knows (e.g., 'Complete red-green-refactor cycle orchestration', 'Kent Beck's original TDD principles'); noticeably padded with no executable payoff.

2 / 5

Actionability

There is no concrete code, command, or specific procedure anywhere; instructions are abstract ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') — it only describes rather than instructs.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Response Approach' gives a rough 8-step sequence, but the steps are poorly defined abstractions ('Establish TDD discipline', 'Orchestrate test workflows') with no concrete commands and no validation checkpoints despite TDD being inherently verification-heavy.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single reference ('open resources/implementation-playbook.md') points to a file that does not exist (no resources/ or references/ directory present), and the bulk capability/trait/knowledge material that belongs in separate files is inlined as one monolithic block with the reference buried.

2 / 5

Total

7

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 states what the skill is but omits any explicit 'when to use it' guidance, capping its completeness. It is reasonably specific and distinct but jargon-heavy and missing natural trigger variations.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause naming concrete trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when orchestrating test-driven development, coordinating multi-agent testing workflows, or enforcing red-green-refactor discipline').

Replace the generic 'comprehensive test-driven development practices' with one or two concrete actions (e.g., 'enforces red-green-refactor cycles and coordinates specialized testing agents').

Add natural-language synonyms users actually say (e.g., 'test-first development', 'write tests first') alongside the jargon to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Master TDD orchestrator') plus a couple of concrete facets ('red-green-refactor discipline', 'multi-agent workflow coordination'), but the third clause ('comprehensive test-driven development practices') is generic rather than a concrete action, so coverage is not comprehensive.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (a TDD orchestrator specializing in three areas) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should invoke it; per the rubric this caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms a user might say ('TDD', 'test-driven development', 'red-green-refactor') but leans on jargon and misses common natural variations or synonyms, so keyword coverage is partial.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'multi-agent workflow coordination' plus 'red-green-refactor' framing carves a fairly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against generic testing/coding skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.