intent-driven-development

Turn ambiguous or high-impact product and engineering changes into scoped, verifiable acceptance criteria before or alongside implementation. Use when a user asks to clarify a feature, define acceptance criteria, de-risk a security/data/migration/integration change, prepare implementation requirements for another agent, or make a complex request testable. Do not trigger for trivial edits, straightforward fixes, active debugging, code review, or implementation requests whose acceptance conditions are already clear unless the user explicitly invokes this skill.

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

77%

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 high-quality, actionable process skill with a clear sequenced workflow, validation checkpoints, and concrete templates and examples. Its main weaknesses are length/redundancy across sections and a monolithic structure that could offload detailed templates and examples into reference files.

Suggestions

Consolidate rules stated in multiple places (e.g. the business-constraint-inference rule and the no-vague-words rule each appear in How It Works, Operating Rules, Workflow, and Quality Check) into a single canonical statement with cross-references.

Move the full Output Template, Pass/Fail Examples, and the boundaries table into reference files (e.g. references/output-template.md, references/pass-fail-examples.md) and signal them from SKILL.md to reduce the inline footprint and improve progressive disclosure.

Trim the Operating Rules section where it restates How It Works / Workflow content verbatim, keeping only rules that add new constraints.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is competent and free of beginner-concept padding, but at ~355 lines it repeats the same rules across sections — e.g. "do not infer product/business constraints from code" appears in How It Works, Operating Rules, Discover Context, and the Output Template, and the "no vague words" rule appears four times — so it could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides a concrete AC-NNN format, a full copy-paste Output Template, a worked CSV-export example, and pass/fail examples — specific, usable guidance rather than abstract direction.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced 6-step Workflow is backed by explicit validation checkpoints (Pass/Fail Rubric checklist, Quality Check) and a revision feedback loop (mark [revised], adjust, re-present) for the risky migration/data contexts the skill targets.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The single SKILL.md is well-organized with clear headers and no nested-reference problem, but at ~355 lines the full Output Template, Pass/Fail Examples, and boundaries table are inline content that could be split into reference files to keep the overview lean.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

100%

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 specific, complete, and well-differentiated, answering both what the skill does and when to use it with natural trigger terms and an explicit exclusion clause. It uses third-person/imperative voice with no first/second-person phrasing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions — "clarify a feature, define acceptance criteria, de-risk a security/data/migration/integration change, prepare implementation requirements for another agent, or make a complex request testable" — rather than vague language.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ("Turn... changes into scoped, verifiable acceptance criteria") and when via an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, plus a "Do not trigger for..." exclusion.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The "Use when a user asks to clarify a feature, define acceptance criteria, de-risk a... change" clause gives good coverage of natural phrases a user would actually say.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (acceptance-criteria/intent-driven development) with an explicit exclusion list ("Do not trigger for trivial edits, straightforward fixes, active debugging, code review") that prevents overlap with adjacent skills.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: affaan-m/ECC
Path: skills/intent-driven-development/SKILL.md
Commit: 754b8dd

Reviewed: 2 days 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.