CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

agentlas-operations

Agentlas 시스템 운용 절차 — hep-network 편성, hep-graph 자동화, cargo/Agent Cloud·marketplace 활용, workforce 로스터 재사용, 메모리 계약. One(개인 에이전트)이 Agentlas를 조작할 때 이 절차를 따른다.

Quality

84%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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.

A dense, well-organized procedural skill that communicates real operational knowledge (reuse-first orchestration, BYOM bundle semantics, memory contract rules, measured pitfalls) with exact tool names and parameters, and near-zero padding. Its consistent weakness is the last mile of executability: no complete example call payloads, no explicit failure-recovery steps, and a canonical external reference (INDEX.md) missing from the bundle.

Suggestions

Actionability: add one complete example invocation — e.g., a full argument payload for workforce.search_candidates and workforce.prepare_execution, or a sample redacted workorder — so the most common calls are copy-paste ready rather than name-plus-key-params.

Workflow clarity: add explicit recovery branches for the key failure points, e.g. 'if validate_selection rejects the redacted copy, resend the original federation result' and what to do when prepare_execution fails, turning the stated pitfalls into feedback loops.

Progressive disclosure: ship INDEX.md inside the skill bundle (or drop the link) — the body designates it as the canonical tool registry ('도구의 존재와 이름은 ... INDEX.md가 정본') but the file is absent from the skill directory.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence — it teaches only non-obvious operational rules ("재사용으로 충분하면 모집하지 않는다", "없는 값을 지어내지 않는다") with no padding or re-explanation of known concepts. However, it inlines a specific date ("오너 결정 2026-08-09: 승인은 만들 때 한 번") that is trimmable time-sensitive information and is not placed in an old-patterns/deprecated section, which per the judging guidelines keeps it below the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Mostly executable guidance: exact tool names with parameters are given throughout — "workforce.search_candidates" with "sourceScope=network", "workforce.validate_selection", "model.resolve_allocation" with the stage enum ("planner/worker/synthesis/verifier"), and near-copy-paste patterns like "hep-orch orchestrator=<tier|model> worker=<tier|model>" and "supersedes":"<h:16hex>". It falls short of anchor 5 because no complete example invocation (a full argument payload for search_candidates or prepare_execution, or a sample redacted workorder) is shown.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The orchestration section has a clear numbered sequence with checkpoints: roster reuse gate first ("workforce.goal_context" → "재사용으로 충분하면 모집하지 않는다"), then workorder → search → host selection → validate_selection → prepare_execution → auto-binding, plus a per-worker allocation step. It is not anchor 5 because feedback loops are implicit rather than explicit — e.g., "축약본은 거절됨" states that abbreviated copies of the federation result are rejected but never says what to do when rejection or prepare_execution failure occurs.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The file is well-sectioned (5 numbered domains plus a pitfalls section) and appropriately sized for a single-file skill, with its tool inventory deliberately delegated one level deep to [INDEX.md](INDEX.md) — clearly signaled. Scored against the actual bundle, however, INDEX.md is not present in the skill directory, so the one authoritative reference it points to dangles; this is a navigation gap that keeps it below anchor 5, though the in-bundle structure itself is good.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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.

A strong description: it states what the skill covers via five named procedure areas, gives an explicit when-to-use trigger tied to the acting agent (One) and the target system (Agentlas), and uses the system's own component names as distinctive triggers. The only minor gap is that capabilities are named at subsystem level without unpacking individual operations.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists several concrete capability areas — "hep-network 편성", "hep-graph 자동화", "cargo/Agent Cloud·marketplace 활용", "workforce 로스터 재사용", "메모리 계약" — matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor. It is above 3 because five distinct capabilities are named rather than 1-2, but below 5 because these are subsystem-level action labels without unpacking what each operation concretely does.

4 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are explicitly answered: the 'what' is the enumerated procedure list ("Agentlas 시스템 운용 절차 — hep-network 편성, ..."), and the 'when' is an explicit trigger clause naming actor and action: "One(개인 에이전트)이 Agentlas를 조작할 때 이 절차를 따른다". This is the equivalent of a 'Use when...' clause with a concrete trigger phrase, so the missing-trigger cap at 3 does not apply, and it is more explicit than the anchor-4 example whose 'when' could be more specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It carries good coverage of the natural vocabulary of this system's users: "Agentlas", "hep-network", "hep-graph", "cargo", "Agent Cloud", "marketplace", "workforce", "메모리". A few natural terms are missing (e.g., worker spawning, plugin, agent search variations), so it sits at 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than the comprehensive synonym-level anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Agentlas 시스템 운용" scoped by uniquely named subsystems (hep-network, hep-graph, cargo, Agent Cloud) is a clear niche with distinct trigger terms; no other skill would plausibly fire on these phrases, matching the minimal-conflict-risk anchor.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

agentlas-ai/Agentlas-OS

Path

claude/plugins/agentlas-core-engine-meta-agent/skills/agentlas-operations/SKILL.md

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.