team-collaboration-standup-notes

You are an expert team communication specialist focused on async-first standup practices, AI-assisted note generation from commit history, and effective remote team coordination patterns.

Quality

43%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/team-collaboration-standup-notes/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is team-collaboration-standup-notes in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

32%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 skill body reads as a generic template: it is reasonably concise but provides almost no concrete, executable guidance, no sequenced workflow, and no validation for its inherently batch/multi-source operation. Its single external reference points to a file that does not exist in the bundle.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract instruction bullets with concrete, executable steps — e.g. the exact commit-range query, ticket-query syntax, output template, and the standup-note format to produce — so the skill is copy-paste actionable.

Add a sequenced workflow with explicit validation checkpoints (e.g. verify MCP integrations are available, confirm ticket/commit coverage before drafting, validate the generated note against the requested format) since this is a batch operation spanning multiple data sources.

Either create the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' (and switch the path consistently to 'references/') or remove the broken reference; a one-level-deep pointer only works if the target file actually exists.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short and largely free of padding about concepts Claude already knows, but the Context paragraph restate capabilities already implied by the title and could be tightened; mostly efficient with some redundancy.	3 / 5
Actionability	Instructions are high-level and abstract ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') with no concrete code, commands, format templates, or specific steps to execute, matching the minimal-concrete-guidance anchor.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Despite the skill performing batch operations across multiple data sources (Obsidian, Jira, Git, calendar), there is no real sequenced workflow and no validation/feedback checkpoints; the steps are poorly defined and validation is absent, matching the rough-or-absent-sequence anchor and well below the destructive/batch cap of 3.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body references 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' as a one-level-deep pointer, but no 'resources/' directory or file exists, making the reference a dead link with no bundle to navigate to; structure is minimal.	2 / 5
	Total	9 / 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 identifies its domain and a couple concrete capabilities but is written in second person and omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance. Trigger terms cover the basics but lack natural user phrasings and synonyms.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person (e.g. 'Generates async standup notes from commit history and calendar context') instead of 'You are an expert...', and add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers such as 'standup notes', 'daily standup', or 'scrum update'.

Expand trigger keywords to include synonyms users naturally say (standup notes, daily standup, scrum, daily update) to improve trigger_term_quality and completeness.

Add a few more concrete actions (e.g. 'summarizes tickets', 'extracts accomplishments from commits', 'formats blocker highlights') to lift specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('async-first standup practices', 'note generation from commit history', 'remote team coordination patterns') with 1-2 concrete actions but no comprehensive action list; second-person 'You are an expert' phrasing reduces specificity per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' (expert team communication for async standups / commit-based note generation) but entirely lacks a 'Use when...' or equivalent 'when' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant keywords like 'standup', 'commit history', and 'remote team' but misses natural user phrasings such as 'standup notes', 'daily standup', 'scrum', or 'daily update' and their synonyms.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a specific niche (standup-note generation from commit history) that is mostly distinct from other skills with only minor overlap risk against general communication or git-summary skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
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/team-collaboration-standup-notes/SKILL.md
Commit: debb2ec

Reviewed: 1 day 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.