CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cs-fullstack-engineer

Fullstack-engineering orchestrator. Walks the Matt Pocock 7-question forcing-question grill, runs the deterministic profile picker, then forks into the POWERFUL-tier specialists (api-design-reviewer, ci-cd-pipeline-builder, database-designer, performance-profiler, slo-architect — listed alphabetically; workflow order is dependency-driven) rather than reimplementing their scope. Forks own context so heavy ingestion does not pollute parent thread. Invoke via /cs:fullstack-review or Agent({subagent_type:"cs-fullstack-engineer",...}).

63

Quality

76%

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 ./.gemini/skills/cs-fullstack-engineer/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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 SKILL.md body is a strong, actionable orchestration guide with executable commands, explicit validation gates, and well-signaled references. Its only weakness is minor verbosity and inline reference listings that could be pushed one level deeper.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and well-structured, with only minor redundancy (invocation contract restated, the "You exist because"/audience rationale slightly padded) that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides fully executable bash commands with exact flags and real CLI invocations, named artifact paths, and concrete digest formats — copy-paste ready examples covering the common greenfield and audit cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Three numbered workflows are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (kill-criteria "STOP", the Karpathy pre-commit gate with a fix-and-re-run feedback loop) and error-recovery guidance for destructive/batch operations.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well-organized with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references (forcing_questions.md, composition_map.md, profile JSONs); the main gap is that the inline tool and knowledge-base listings could be split into a separate file rather than enumerated in the overview.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

63%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 concrete and specific about capabilities and clearly distinct, but leans heavily on proprietary jargon for its triggers and lacks an explicit "Use when..." clause, leaving the activation condition implied rather than stated.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as "Use when picking a stack for a fullstack product, running a forcing-question grill, or routing architecture decisions to specialists."

Soften internal jargon ("POWERFUL-tier", "profile picker", "forcing-question grill") with natural user-facing terms like "stack decisions", "architecture review", and "question-by-question interview".

Lead with the user-facing outcome ("Picks a fullstack stack and routes sub-concerns to specialists") before the orchestration mechanics.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions ("Walks the Matt Pocock 7-question forcing-question grill", "runs the deterministic profile picker", "forks into the POWERFUL-tier specialists") and names five specialists, giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.

5 / 5

Completeness

It has a clear "what" but the "when" is only weakly implied via invocation syntax rather than an explicit "Use when..." clause, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes some relevant keywords ("fullstack", "stack") but is dominated by internal jargon ("forcing-question grill", "POWERFUL-tier", "profile picker") rather than the natural phrases a user would say, missing common synonyms.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear and specific (fullstack orchestration with named specialists and explicit invocation paths), with only minor overlap risk against sibling cs-engineer skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 4 missing, 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
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.