product-capability

Translate PRD intent, roadmap asks, or product discussions into an implementation-ready capability plan that exposes constraints, invariants, interfaces, and unresolved decisions before multi-service work starts. Use when the user needs an ECC-native PRD-to-SRS lane instead of vague planning prose.

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Quality

Content

50%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, instruction-only planning skill with a clear workflow and a concrete output template. It is held at level 2 across dimensions by mild motivational padding, the absence of a worked example, implicit validation checkpoints, and no progressive disclosure to its own supporting files.

Suggestions

Add a short worked example (a filled CAPABILITY/CONSTRAINTS/IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT block) to make the output format copy-paste concrete and lift actionability.

Insert an explicit verification checkpoint in the workflow (e.g., 'Confirm every OPEN QUESTION is either resolved or marked as a blocker before handoff') to strengthen workflow clarity.

Trim editorial asides ('The goal is not...', 'These are the things that often live only in senior-engineer memory', 'If this statement is weak, the implementation will drift') for conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient structured guidance, but editorial asides like 'The goal is not to create another planning stack... reusable', 'These are the things that often live only in senior-engineer memory', and 'If this statement is weak, the implementation will drift' are motivational padding that could be trimmed.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides a concrete output-format template and enumerated checklists plus named handoff lanes, but there is no worked example and the workflow steps are category lists rather than fully specific guidance.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence (Restate, Resolve constraints, Define contract, Translate into execution) is present, but validation checkpoints are only implicit via the final handoff classification with no explicit verify/feedback step.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized, but ~135 lines live inline in a single file with no own bundle files; the only reference is an external repo template path (docs/examples/product-capability-template.md), so there is no one-level-deep progressive disclosure to supporting files.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

85%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, third-person description that states concrete actions and an explicit use-trigger with a clear niche. Its main weakness is the trigger clause's reliance on internal jargon ('ECC-native PRD-to-SRS lane') over natural user phrasing.

Suggestions

Rewrite the 'Use when' clause in plainer, user-natural terms (e.g., 'Use when turning a PRD, roadmap item, or product discussion into implementation-ready constraints') to lift trigger term quality.

Drop or gloss the 'ECC-native PRD-to-SRS lane' jargon so the trigger reads as something a user would actually say.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions ('Translate PRD intent, roadmap asks, or product discussions into an implementation-ready capability plan that exposes constraints, invariants, interfaces, and unresolved decisions'), matching the multi-action anchor rather than the single-domain anchor at 2.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what it does and when to use it via an explicit 'Use when the user needs...' trigger, matching the level-3 anchor; not level 2 because the trigger is present rather than implied.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms appear ('PRD intent, roadmap asks, product discussions') but the 'Use when' clause leans on jargon ('ECC-native PRD-to-SRS lane') rather than broadly natural user phrasing, so it is not the full-coverage level 3.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (PRD-to-capability planning) with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; the 'ECC-native PRD-to-SRS lane' framing reinforces distinctiveness.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 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
Commit: 4130457

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.