CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

clarify-question-loop

Use when a meta-agent request is too ambiguous to safely generate, package, publish, or adapt without one to five targeted questions.

61

Quality

71%

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 ./.agents/skills/clarify-question-loop/SKILL.md
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.

The body is a well-structured, actionable instruction skill with concrete budgets, a verbatim default question, and translation rules, plus a clear sequenced procedure with escalation checkpoints. Minor redundancy (a duplicated question) and the absence of a deeper reference bundle keep it just short of top marks.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean and assumes competence, giving specific budgets and translations rather than explaining concepts Claude already knows; the only trim opportunity is the Korean question duplicated in both the Procedure and Default Questions sections.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance is provided throughout — exact batch sizes ("chat 3-5," "stormbreaker <= 8," "build 8-12"), a verbatim plain-language question, and explicit translation mappings — with only minor gaps in coverage.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The eight-step Procedure is clearly sequenced with checkpoints (re-run classification in step 7, escalate to the Builder gate in step 5) and a stop-rule section, missing only a fully explicit validate-fix-retry loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well-organized into clearly signaled sections (Procedure, Budgets, Default Questions, Plain-Language Question Rule, Reference) with a one-level pointer to docs/clarify-question-loop.md, though no bundle files exist to verify deeper reference structure.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

67%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 gives a clear, specific trigger tied to a concrete question-count mechanism, but leans on technical jargon ("meta-agent request") that users would not naturally say. It answers both what and when but embeds the what rather than stating it plainly.

Suggestions

Add natural-language trigger phrasing a user would actually say (e.g., "when a build/publish request is too vague to start safely") to lift trigger_term_quality.

State the action explicitly up front ("Ask one to five targeted clarifying questions") rather than embedding it in the when-clause, to strengthen completeness.

Replace or gloss "meta-agent request" with a plainer term to reduce overlap with generic clarification skills and improve distinctiveness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete actions — "safely generate, package, publish, or adapt" — plus the mechanism of "one to five targeted questions," landing at several specific actions with minor coverage gaps rather than comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

An explicit "Use when..." clause covers the trigger concretely and the embedded "without one to five targeted questions" conveys the what, though the what is implied rather than stated as a standalone action.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant domain keywords are present ("too ambiguous," "generate, package, publish, or adapt") but "meta-agent request" is technical jargon users would not naturally say, missing common natural phrasings.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The narrow meta-agent packaging/publishing niche is mostly distinct with minimal conflict risk, though it could overlap with a generic clarification skill.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
agentlas-ai/Agentlas-OS
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.