CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

procurement-optimizer

Use when running an annual SaaS audit, doing category-level spend review, or rationalizing the supplier base — when the user needs a spend audit, spend categorization (UNSPSC-aligned with Pareto breakdown and industry profiles), purchasing-cycle analysis (bottleneck categories per Goldratt's Theory of Constraints), or risk-balanced supplier consolidation that refuses single-source recommendations for tier-1 categories without a documented break-glass plan. Triggers on "spend audit", "SaaS audit", "spend categorization", "supplier rationalization", "supplier consolidation", "category strategy", "duplicate SaaS", "renewal cluster".

72

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

The risk profile of this skill

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

80%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 highly actionable, well-structured skill body with concrete commands, input schemas, and clean one-level-deep bundle navigation. The main gap is the absence of explicit validation checkpoints in the workflow, which the rubric caps at 3 for batch operations; minor conciseness gains are available by collapsing the forcing-question library and the overlapping Distinct-from/When-NOT-to-use sections.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint between workflow steps (e.g. after Step 2 verify categorized.md accounts for all line items; after Step 4 verify no tier-1 single-source recommendation appears without a break-glass flag), with a fix-and-rerun loop — this would lift workflow_clarity above the batch-operation cap of 3.

Move the 7-question forcing-question library into a references/ file (e.g. references/forcing_questions.md) and keep only a one-line pointer plus the depth-first instruction in SKILL.md, reclaiming ~30 lines of context budget.

Merge the "When NOT to use" and "Distinct from" sections, which cover the same sibling-skill boundaries twice, into a single concise boundary list.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no generic explanations of what a category or renewal is), but the fully inlined 7-question forcing-question library and the "Distinct from" section — which substantially overlaps the earlier "When NOT to use" — could be trimmed or offloaded; not a 3 because the bulk of tokens are domain-specific operational detail that earns its place, and not a 5 because those two sections are noticeable padding.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready commands with full flags (e.g. `scripts/spend_categorizer.py --input spend.json --profile <profile> --output categorized.md`), concrete input schemas (`{supplier, description, category_hint, annual_spend, frequency, currency}`), a scripts table, and a `--sample` quick example; specific examples cover the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear, well-sequenced 5-step workflow (Intake → Categorize → Cycle → Consolidation → Synthesize) with per-step commands, but there are no explicit validate→fix→retry checkpoints for what is batch data processing; the rubric caps batch-operation workflows without validation at 3, and the safety guardrail (tier-1 single-source refusal) lives implicitly inside the script rather than as a stated verification step — so it cannot score 4 despite the strong sequencing.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview/workflow that points to well-signaled, one-level-deep bundle files (scripts/ table, references/ listed with descriptions, assets/spend_intake_template.md in Step 1); all referenced paths exist and the canon files do not chain into further references, so content is appropriately split and easy to navigate.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 high-quality description: concrete capabilities, an explicit Use-when clause, a separate natural-language trigger list, and a sharp niche boundary reinforced by the tier-1 single-source guardrail. No vague fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions — "spend categorization (UNSPSC-aligned with Pareto breakdown and industry profiles)", "purchasing-cycle analysis (bottleneck categories per Goldratt's Theory of Constraints)", "risk-balanced supplier consolidation" — with comprehensive coverage and no vague filler; not a 4 because coverage is full rather than having minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers both what (audit, categorization, cycle analysis, consolidation) and when ("Use when running an annual SaaS audit, doing category-level spend review, or rationalizing the supplier base" plus concrete trigger phrases); not a 4 because both halves are explicit and concrete.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

An explicit "Triggers on" list supplies eight natural phrases users would say ("spend audit", "SaaS audit", "spend categorization", "supplier rationalization", "supplier consolidation", "category strategy", "duplicate SaaS", "renewal cluster") including synonyms; not a 4 because the term set is comprehensive rather than missing a few.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (procurement spend rationalization + supplier consolidation) with distinct triggers and a distinguishing guardrail ("refuses single-source recommendations for tier-1 categories without a documented break-glass plan") that separates it from sibling vendor-management; minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

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.