covert-alliance-formation

Use when building secret alliances against a central authority while maintaining deniability. Covers verbal-only communication, shared grievance framing, self-interest appeals, and network expansion through confirmed allies.

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_194/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

78%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 content is concise and well-structured with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit verification, but its guidance stays abstract and lacks executable specifics and error-recovery feedback loops, which caps actionability and workflow_clarity below the top anchor.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable specifics to key steps (e.g., what 'verbal communication only' concretely entails, a sample envoy script or talking points) to lift actionability.

Add an error-recovery feedback loop in the Verification section (e.g., 'If a channel is exposed, revert to verbal-only and re-screen affected allies') to reach the 5 anchor for workflow_clarity.

Make Decision Points more actionable by specifying the concrete action taken at each branch rather than only stating the condition.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and efficient with no padding and no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	It gives some concrete procedural guidance with specific framing points ('unjust treatment', 'territorial encroachment', 'corrupt ministers') but the steps are abstract rather than executable specifics, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details' anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is a clear 7-step sequence plus an explicit Verification section, but it lacks a validate-then-fix-retry feedback loop, so it sits at the 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps' anchor rather than 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references and is organized into clear sections (Overview, Steps, Decision Points, Expected Outcomes, Verification), satisfying the simple-skill exception that allows a 5 from well-organized sections alone.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 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 is well-constructed with an explicit 'Use when' trigger, a concrete list of covered actions, and a highly distinctive niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage, which leans on one phrasing rather than natural synonyms a user might say.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms a user would say, e.g. 'Use when forming coalitions, building secret alliances, or coordinating against a central power while maintaining deniability.'

Tighten the 'when' clause into multiple concrete trigger phrases to push completeness toward the 5 anchor.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and lists several concrete actions ('verbal-only communication, shared grievance framing, self-interest appeals, and network expansion through confirmed allies'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not a 5 because coverage is not fully comprehensive.	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both 'what' (the Covers list of actions) and 'when' (the 'Use when building secret alliances...' clause), but the 'when' is a single trigger clause rather than multiple concrete trigger phrases, so it sits below the 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It has relevant trigger phrases ('building secret alliances', 'maintaining deniability') but lacks common synonyms or variations a user would naturally say, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It carves a clear, narrow niche (covert alliance formation against a central authority) with distinct triggers and minimal realistic overlap with other skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk' anchor.	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: baojie/shiji-kb
Path: kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_194/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 8 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.