cs-cto-advisor

Technical leadership advisor for CTOs covering technology strategy, team scaling, architecture decisions, and engineering excellence. Use when a CTO or technical founder needs company-level technology judgment — e.g., deciding build-vs-buy for a core platform component, or planning how to scale the engineering org from 5 to 30 engineers without losing delivery velocity.

Quality

66%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.gemini/skills/cs-cto-advisor/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%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 well-structured and actionable with concrete workflows and runnable scripts, but it is significantly over-padded with concept explanations and inline reference material that Claude already knows or that belongs in the linked reference files. Workflows lack explicit validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Remove definitional padding Claude already knows (DORA metric explanations, what deployment frequency means) and keep only the operational targets and benchmarks.

Move the inlined success-metrics tables and metric definitions into the referenced engineering_metrics.md knowledge base, keeping SKILL.md as an overview pointer.

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints to workflows (e.g., 'verify calculator output ratios are within healthy bounds before finalizing the hiring plan').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~400-line body is noticeably verbose, explaining concepts Claude already knows (DORA metric definitions like 'Deployment Frequency: How often deploying to production') and repeating cat/python invocation snippets across workflows and padded success-metrics lists.	2 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete bash commands, specific team ratios (Manager:Engineer 1:8, Senior:Mid:Junior 3:4:2), and copy-pasteable dashboard scripts, with minor gaps since the referenced Python tools are external and not shown.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Four workflows are clearly sequenced with goals, steps, expected outputs, and time estimates, but validation/verification checkpoints are absent or only implicit throughout.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section structure is reasonable and external references are signaled with one-level-deep paths, but substantial reference-like material (DORA definitions, success-metrics tables, ratio details) is inlined rather than moved to the referenced knowledge-base files.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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 is strong: it states a clear purpose, names specific capability domains, and provides an explicit 'Use when' trigger with concrete CTO-level examples. Third-person voice is correctly used throughout. The main gap is that capability areas are advisory domains rather than discrete executable actions.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several specific capability areas ('technology strategy, team scaling, architecture decisions, and engineering excellence') plus concrete examples (build-vs-buy, scaling 5→30), though these are advisory domains rather than discrete actions.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what (technical leadership advisor covering four named domains) and when ('Use when a CTO or technical founder needs...') with concrete trigger examples.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrasings a CTO would voice ('company-level technology judgment', 'build-vs-buy', 'scale the engineering org'), with good keyword coverage though a few common variants are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear CTO-level niche with distinct role-specific triggers; minor overlap risk with general engineering-advisor skills but unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing, 4 suspicious	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Path: .gemini/skills/cs-cto-advisor/SKILL.md
Commit: 19392f7

Reviewed: ~5 hours 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.