CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ideate

Timeboxed ideation on a topic using propose-and-critique subagent pairs. Use when the user wants to brainstorm, explore ideas, discover features, generate options, or think through possibilities for a specified duration. Triggers on requests like "brainstorm X for 30 minutes", "ideate on X", "spend an hour thinking about X", "what features should we build", "explore options for X".

69

Quality

84%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%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 is highly actionable and its workflow is unambiguous with strong feedback loops, but it is a monolithic 260-line file with no external references and noticeable internal repetition of the clock-enforcement rule. Splitting templates into reference files and consolidating the three redundant anti-exit sections would raise both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Consolidate 'The Iron Law', 'Preventing Premature Exit', and 'Red Flags' into a single section (e.g., one table of trap-thought → required-action plus a short list of mechanical red flags) — the same no-early-exit rule is currently stated three times.

Move the full proposer prompt, critic prompt, and presentation templates into references/ files (e.g., references/prompts.md) and keep one-line pointers in SKILL.md so the main file is a lean orchestration overview.

Drop or shrink the 'Quick Reference' table, since every row (time check, iteration structure, stall threshold, default top N) already appears verbatim in the body sections above it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The core content (dispatch loop, prompt templates, progress-file format) is efficient, but the anti-premature-exit rule is repeated three times in different forms — 'The Iron Law' block, the six-row 'Preventing Premature Exit' table, and the 'Red Flags' list — and the 'Quick Reference' table restates steps already detailed above. That is noticeable duplication that could be tightened, fitting anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened') better than anchor 2, since none of it is background explanation of concepts Claude already knows.

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: exact commands ('Run `date +%s`'), concrete file path patterns ('/tmp/ideate-<topic-slug>-<timestamp>.md'), copy-paste-ready proposer and critic prompt templates, an iteration log format, and a final presentation template. Every step tells the agent exactly what to do.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The eight-step process is clearly sequenced with an explicit checkpoint before every dispatch ('Check the time... BEFORE every dispatch'), the digraph shows the decision diamond and loop-back edge, and there are explicit feedback loops for error recovery (Stall Recovery with four concrete strategies, plus steering rules keyed to score bands). This matches the anchor-5 pattern of clear sequence, explicit validation checkpoints, and recovery loops.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files at all, and the 260-line body inlines material that plausibly belongs in reference files — the full proposer/critic prompt templates and the presentation template could live in references/ with one-line pointers, leaving SKILL.md as the orchestration overview. Structure within the file is good (clear headers, templates fenced), which keeps this at anchor 3 ('some structure but could be better organized; content that should be separate is inline') rather than 2.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

91%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 in third-person voice that clearly states what the skill does, when to use it, and gives multiple natural trigger phrasings. Its only weaknesses are that the deliverable (ranked ideas with critique scores) is left implicit, and a couple of the trigger examples could overlap with non-timeboxed brainstorming requests.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the mechanism concretely ('timeboxed ideation... using propose-and-critique subagent pairs') and several specific actions ('brainstorm, explore ideas, discover features, generate options, or think through possibilities'). Not a 5 because it never states the output the skill produces (e.g., ranked top-N ideas with scores), so coverage of what the skill actually does has a minor gap.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'what' (timeboxed ideation via propose-and-critique subagent pairs) and 'when' with a clear 'Use when the user wants to...' clause plus concrete trigger request examples. This matches the anchor-5 good example structure almost exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-language triggers users would actually say: "brainstorm X for 30 minutes", "ideate on X", "spend an hour thinking about X", "what features should we build", "explore options for X". Covers phrasings across formality levels, matching the anchor's standard of natural terms including synonyms.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The timebox framing ('for a specified duration', timed trigger examples) carves a clear niche, but broad triggers like "what features should we build" and "explore options for X" could fire for ordinary brainstorming requests where the user does not want a 30-minute subagent loop — a minor overlap risk with general ideation/brainstorming skills, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
av/harbor
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.