delegation-by-comparative-advantage

Use when assigning leadership roles to maximize team effectiveness based on relative strengths. Follows Fan Li's advice to Goujian: directly compare each advisor's capabilities across domains (military vs. civil) and assign primary roles where each person excels most.

Quality

66%

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 ./kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_108/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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 a lean, well-structured single-purpose skill with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit verification checkpoints. Its primary gap is actionability: the assessment step prescribes what to do without a concrete method for evaluating relative strengths.

Suggestions

Add a concrete method for 'assess each advisor's strengths', such as a capability-rating template or a list of domains to score, so the first step is executable rather than abstract.

Trim or sharpen the 'Expected Outcomes' section to remove generic restatements of the skill's purpose.

Optionally add a short worked example mapping a sample team through the four steps to make the procedure copy-paste ready.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes competence; the only minor padding is the somewhat obvious 'Expected Outcomes' list ('Optimal use of available talent', 'Organizational efficiency'), matching the 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete guidance exists via the decision-framework table and the verbatim comparison quote, but 'assess each advisor's strengths' and 'compare capabilities directly' lack a specific evaluation method, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 4-step sequence is clearly ordered and the dedicated Verification section provides explicit checkpoints, matching the 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present' anchor; the operation is not destructive/batch so the cap does not apply.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files and is organized into well-labeled sections (Overview, Steps, Decision Framework, Expected Outcomes, Verification), matching the simple-skill exception that allows a 5 for well-organized single-file content.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 reasonably distinct niche and low conflict risk. Its main weakness is moderate trigger-term coverage and only partially comprehensive capability specificity.

Suggestions

Add natural trigger synonyms and concrete phrases users would say (e.g. 'delegate tasks', 'who should lead', 'split responsibilities between team members') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

List a few more concrete capabilities (e.g. 'build a capability matrix', 'identify the expendable-but-capable emissary') to lift specificity above 1-2 actions.

Make the 'when' clause more scenario-specific by naming concrete situations (e.g. 'Use when forming a leadership team, splitting civil and military responsibilities, or choosing an emissary').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and 1-2 concrete actions ('directly compare each advisor's capabilities across domains', 'assign primary roles where each person excels most') but coverage is not comprehensive, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor.	3 / 5
Completeness	Answers both 'what' (compare capabilities, assign primary roles) and 'when' ('Use when assigning leadership roles to maximize team effectiveness based on relative strengths'), but the 'when' could be more specific about triggering scenarios, matching the 'has both what and when; when could be more explicit' anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some natural phrases users would say ('assigning leadership roles', 'relative strengths', 'team effectiveness') but lacks common synonyms and variations, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The delegation-by-comparative-advantage niche is mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against generic team-management skills, matching the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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_108/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 7 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.