timeboxed-iterating

Use when the user specifies a task and a duration, and the work should be done iteratively by subagents over that time period

Quality

72%

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 ./.agents/skills/timeboxed-iterating/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

73%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 highly actionable with a clear, well-validated workflow, concrete commands, and copy-paste templates. Its weaknesses are deliberate redundancy across the anti-stop-early sections and inlining of content that could be offloaded to reference files.

Suggestions

Consolidate the overlapping anti-exit material (Iron Law, the 12-row table, Red Flags) into a single section or a reference file to reduce redundancy and lift conciseness.

Move the subagent prompt template and anti-exit table into a references/ file (e.g. PROMPT.md, ANTI_EXIT.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview — this also practices the context-economy thesis the skill preaches.

Fix the ```dot fenced block (it should be ```dot but the rendered graphviz is non-executable content) or replace it with a plain numbered summary to avoid a broken/non-functional diagram.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Quotes the repeated anti-stop-early message across "The Iron Law", the 12-row "Preventing Premature Exit" table, "Preventing Sabotaged Runs", and the "Red Flags" list — the same injunction is reinforced in four overlapping forms, which is padded relative to token budget despite otherwise lean, command-level guidance.	3 / 5
Actionability	Quotes concrete commands ("date +%s"), an exact path convention ("/tmp/timeboxed-<goal-slug>-<timestamp>.md"), and a copy-paste subagent prompt template; stays just below anchor 5 because the ```dot graphviz block is non-executable and several templates are placeholder-heavy.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Quotes the numbered 6-step process with an explicit validation checkpoint ("This check happens BEFORE every dispatch, never after"), a stall-recovery feedback loop (reframe → increase depth → broaden scope → log after 3 failures), and a red-flags checklist, matching anchor 5's clear sequence with validation, feedback loops, and checklists.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Quotes well-organized sections (Your Role, Iron Law, Inputs, Process, Stall Recovery, Quick Reference) with no nested references and no bundle files present; sits below anchor 5 because the 12-row anti-exit table and subagent prompt template are inlined when they could live in a reference file to keep the orchestrator's loaded context lean.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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 clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with a distinctive task-plus-duration trigger that minimizes conflict risk. Its main weakness is a single trigger phrasing and somewhat abstract action description rather than multiple concrete capabilities.

Suggestions

Add concrete capabilities to the description, e.g. "dispatches subagents, tracks progress in a file, and runs until a user-specified deadline" to lift specificity toward anchor 5.

Broaden trigger coverage with natural synonyms such as "run for X hours", "overnight", or "timeboxed" so the description matches phrases users actually say.

Tighten the "what" to a concrete verb-led action (third person) rather than the passive "the work should be done iteratively".

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Quotes "the work should be done iteratively by subagents over that time period" — names the domain plus a concrete iterative-subagent mechanism; falls short of anchor 5 because it lists only one action pattern rather than multiple concrete capabilities, and sits above anchor 3 by specifying the dispatch mechanism.	4 / 5
Completeness	Quotes both a "what" ("work should be done iteratively by subagents over that time period") and an explicit "when" ("Use when the user specifies a task and a duration"); the "what" is present but slightly abstract, so it does not reach anchor 5's fully concrete trigger-phrasing, and it clears the missing-"Use when" cap of 3.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Quotes "the user specifies a task and a duration" — one natural, concrete trigger, but the description omits common variations (e.g. "run for X hours", "overnight", "timeboxed") that the body covers; matches anchor 3's "some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms."	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Quotes "specifies a task and a duration" combined with "iteratively by subagents over that time period" — a clear niche with distinct dual-input triggers and minimal overlap risk, matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: av/harbor
Path: .agents/skills/timeboxed-iterating/SKILL.md
Commit: 67cbe66

Reviewed: 2 days 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.