CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

prd

Requirements-to-PRD workflow that ingests requirements from Jira, clarifies ambiguities through iterative Q&A, drafts a Product Requirements Document, and manages review via GitHub PRs. Use when creating PRDs, analyzing requirements, or preparing feature specifications for review. Activated by commands: /ingest, /clarify, /draft, /revise, /publish, /respond.

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

The canonical home for this skill is prd in flightctl/ai-workflows

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 well-structured orchestrator body: extremely lean, clearly sequenced dispatch logic with an explicit error-handling checkpoint, and appropriate one-level-deep delegation to command and controller files. The gaps keeping it from top scores are an unhandled dispatch case (no command, no Jira key, no phase requested) and the fact that all execution substance — including the referenced files themselves — lives outside the body and cannot be verified in this bundle.

Suggestions

Define the fallback dispatch case: when the user invokes no command, provides no Jira issue, and names no phase, state the default behavior (e.g., ask the user which phase to start, or begin with /ingest) instead of leaving it undefined.

Briefly enumerate the available phases/commands in the body (they currently appear only in the frontmatter description) so the orchestrator's scope is visible without opening skills/controller.md, and confirm `commands/{command}.md`, `skills/controller.md`, and `guidelines.md` actually ship in the bundle.

Add one concrete dispatch example — e.g., a sample Jira issue key format or a short "user says X → run phase Y" mapping — so the Quick Start guidance is copy-paste ready rather than fully delegated.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~25-line body is lean dispatcher prose with zero concept explanations and no padding — every line is instruction ("read `commands/{command}.md` and follow it", "read `skills/controller.md` to load the workflow controller"), and the error-handling paragraph adds only actionable content. It matches the 5 anchor: assumes Claude's competence and every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is concrete for a dispatcher — exact file paths, named commands (`/draft`, `/clarify`, `/ingest`), specific failure examples ("Jira MCP errors, network failures, invalid issue keys") and a defined error protocol. It falls short of the 5 anchor (fully executable, covers the common cases) because one dispatch case is undefined — a user who invokes no command, provides no Jira key, and names no phase — and all actual execution detail is delegated to controller.md rather than given even in outline.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The entry sequence is clear (command → commands/{command}.md; otherwise → controller.md with a Jira-key/no-key branch) and there is an explicit failure checkpoint with a feedback loop ("stop and report the error... Do not advance... Offer to retry... or escalate"). It sits at the 4 anchor rather than 5 because the sequence delegates phase ordering entirely to an external file and leaves the no-input case undefined, so the checkpoints are present but the full flow is not self-contained.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview that pushes all detail one level deep through clearly signaled references (`commands/{command}.md`, `skills/controller.md`, `guidelines.md`), matching the good-structure pattern. It does not reach 5 because the referenced files are not present in the bundle to verify (no commands/, skills/, or guidelines.md exist here) and the available commands are not enumerated in the body — they are only discoverable from the frontmatter description, a minor organization gap.

4 / 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 strong description: concrete, third-person action verbs with named integrations, an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause with natural synonyms, and a clearly distinct requirements-to-PRD niche. It closely follows the best-practice pattern in the reference examples with no padding or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions with named integrations — "ingests requirements from Jira", "clarifies ambiguities through iterative Q&A", "drafts a Product Requirements Document", "manages review via GitHub PRs" — covering the full workflow comprehensively. It matches the 5 anchor (multiple specific concrete actions, comprehensive coverage) and exceeds the 4 anchor, which allows minor coverage gaps; no phase of the stated workflow is left out.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the "what" is the four concrete workflow actions, and the "when" is an explicit "Use when creating PRDs, analyzing requirements, or preparing feature specifications for review" clause with concrete trigger phrases. This is the 5 anchor verbatim in structure, not the 4 anchor where the "when" could be more specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings are covered with synonyms: "creating PRDs" (with PRD expanded as "Product Requirements Document" earlier in the text), "analyzing requirements", "preparing feature specifications for review", plus domain names "Jira" and "GitHub PRs". This matches the 5 anchor's comprehensive synonym coverage; there are no obvious natural variations users would say that are missing for this domain.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The requirements-to-PRD niche with Jira ingestion and GitHub PR review management is a clear, specific domain with distinct triggers; it would not plausibly fire for unrelated skills. It matches the 5 anchor (clear niche with distinct triggers, minimal conflict risk) rather than the 4 anchor, which requires residual overlap with closely related skills.

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.

Validation — 15 / 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

amir-yogev-gh/ai-workflows

Path

prd/SKILL.md

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.