CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

workflow-automation

You are a workflow automation architect who has seen both the promise and the pain of these platforms. You've migrated teams from brittle cron jobs to durable execution and watched their on-call burden drop by 80%.

38

Quality

36%

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/workflow-automation/SKILL.md

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

36%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 structurally stubbed but largely empty of usable guidance: anti-pattern sections have no content, the sharp-edges table is a broken template, and patterns are one-line abstractions with no executable examples or validation steps. It reads as an unfinished skeleton.

Suggestions

Replace the broken Sharp Edges table and empty Anti-Patterns sections with concrete guidance — real issue names and actionable solutions, e.g. 'Always pass idempotency keys on external calls: `await step.run(() => stripe.charges.create({ idempotencyKey: event.id }))`'.

Add executable code or command examples for each pattern (Sequential, Parallel, Orchestrator-Worker) in at least one platform (e.g. Inngest or Temporal), not just one-line abstract descriptions.

Provide a sequenced migration workflow with validation checkpoints for risky operations (migrate cron job -> dry-run validate -> enable -> monitor), including a validate-fix-retry feedback loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly short, but the opening persona repeats the frontmatter description verbatim and the platform-comparison paragraph explains tradeoffs (n8n vs Temporal vs Inngest) that Claude already knows.

3 / 5

Actionability

Only high-level hints are present — pattern names with one-line descriptions and comment-style solution placeholders like '# ALWAYS use idempotency keys for external calls'; there is no executable code, commands, or concrete steps.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Rough structural organization exists (patterns, anti-patterns, sharp edges) but there is no sequenced workflow and no validation/verification checkpoints for risky automation operations.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Section headers provide some structure, but the anti-pattern sections are empty, the Sharp Edges table is broken (every 'Issue' cell literally says 'Issue'), and no bundle files exist to offload detail.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

36%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 is a second-person persona/credential statement rather than a capability statement: it names the domain but lists no concrete actions and provides no 'when to use' trigger guidance. It needs a third-person rewrite with explicit trigger phrases.

Suggestions

Rewrite the description in third person stating concrete capabilities (e.g., 'Designs and migrates workflows to durable-execution platforms like Temporal, Inngest, and DBOS') instead of a second-person persona narrative.

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when migrating cron jobs, building scheduled/background tasks, or choosing a workflow-orchestration platform').

Include platform names and synonyms (n8n, Temporal, Inngest, DBOS, job queues, step functions) so the description surfaces for the full range of user phrasings.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (workflow automation, durable execution, cron jobs) and one concrete action ('migrated teams from brittle cron jobs to durable execution'), but capabilities are framed as a persona credential; the second-person voice ('You are', 'You've migrated') triggers a -1 penalty from a base of 3.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is vague (a persona narrative rather than a capability statement) and there is no 'Use when...' trigger guidance, matching the anchor for a vague 'what' with no 'when'.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some natural terms users might say ('workflow automation', 'cron jobs') but misses common synonyms and variations like 'scheduled tasks', 'background jobs', 'job queues', or 'step functions'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The workflow-automation/durable-execution niche is somewhat distinct, but the generic 'these platforms' phrasing and persona framing create overlap risk with backend/devops skills.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

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.