Tessl • The package manager for agent skills

SkillPublic

cfo-review

/cs:cfo-review <plan> — Numerate-skeptic interrogation of any plan that touches money. Unit economics, runway, dilution, capital allocation. Use when a plan commits meaningful spend — e.g. a hiring wave, a fundraise decision, or a new channel budget.

Quality

82%

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

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 tight, high-signal skill body: six concrete questions with numeric thresholds, a defined verdict scheme, and an exact output template. Weaknesses are confined to the script invocations lacking arguments/inputs and references pointing outside the skill bundle with no local fallback.

Suggestions

Show how the three python scripts receive input (e.g. 'python .../burn_rate_calculator.py <metrics.csv> or key=value flags) so the commands are truly copy-paste executable.

Add a short fallback for when the referenced scripts or the ../../../c-level-advisor bundle is unavailable — e.g. compute burn multiple, LTV/CAC, and runway directly from the plan's numbers.

Trim the opening tagline, which repeats the frontmatter description, and fold the Routing section's purpose into the verdict step (e.g. 'log via /cs:decide, build via /cs:execute if GREEN').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean and dense — assumes competence (uses 'burn multiple', 'LTV / CAC', 'default-alive' without explaining them) — but the opening tagline 'The numerate skeptic stress-tests anything that touches money. Six questions before any spend or fundraise.' duplicates the frontmatter description and could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides exact numeric thresholds ('Above 2x is a problem', 'LTV / CAC > 3x is healthy. Payback < 12 months') and a copy-paste output template, but the three python script invocations carry no arguments, so it is unclear how plan data reaches them.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear three-step sequence (run the numbers → answer all six questions → apply verdict) with GREEN/YELLOW/RED decision gates, but there is no guidance for handling script failures or missing data, leaving minor validation gaps.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-sectioned body with nothing inlined that belongs in a separate file and clearly signaled references, but the referenced scripts, agent, and related skill all live outside the skill directory (../../../c-level-advisor/...) and no bundle files exist alongside SKILL.md, so navigation depends on unverifiable external paths.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

82%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: third-person, concise, with an explicit 'Use when' clause carrying concrete trigger examples and natural keywords. The main weakness is that capabilities are expressed as topic areas rather than specific actions.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("Numerate-skeptic interrogation of any plan that touches money") and enumerates topic areas ("Unit economics, runway, dilution, capital allocation"), but these are subject areas rather than concrete actions, so coverage of what the skill actually does is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ("Numerate-skeptic interrogation of any plan that touches money. Unit economics, runway, dilution, capital allocation") and when ("Use when a plan commits meaningful spend — e.g. a hiring wave, a fundraise decision, or a new channel budget") with concrete trigger examples.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrases users would say — "money", "spend", "hiring wave", "fundraise decision", "new channel budget" — but misses common variations like "cash flow", "burn", or "pricing".	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear CFO/finance-review niche with distinct triggers (spend approval, fundraising, hiring, budget) and a named slash command; minimal overlap with other plausible skills.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 2 suspicious	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Path: c-level-agents/skills/cfo-review/SKILL.md
Revision: 19392f7

Reviewed: 12 hours ago

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.

cfo-review

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?