soldier-centered-leadership

Use when building deep military loyalty and unit cohesion. Shares hardships, distributes rewards equitably, and leads by example to create soldiers willing to follow into the most dangerous engagements.

Quality

75%

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_208/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.

A well-organized, concise leadership-philosophy skill that earns high marks for structure and token efficiency. Its chief weakness is actionability: it delivers principles and verification checkpoints but little concrete guidance on how to operationalize them in a specific leadership scenario.

Suggestions

Add a short 'Applying these principles' subsection with a concrete example scenario showing how to sequence the directives in practice.

Tighten the Overview so it does not restate the frontmatter description, and trim 'Expected Outcomes' to the one or two outcomes that are not already implied.

Turn the Verification bullets into an explicit validate→adjust→recheck loop so the checkpoints function as a feedback process rather than a static checklist.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean bullet-driven prose with no padded explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the Overview slightly restates the frontmatter and 'Expected Outcomes' is mildly redundant, keeping it just below the every-token-earns-its-place 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete behavioral directives exist ('Do not drink water until all soldiers have drunk', 'Camp near good water and pasture when possible') but the skill stops at principles and omits how to actually apply or sequence them in a real situation, matching the some-concrete-guidance-but-incomplete anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	As a simple single-purpose skill the content is clearly organized into Principles, Expected Outcomes, and a Verification section with explicit checkpoints ('Confirm...', 'Validate...', 'Check...'); it is not a 5 because there is no validate→fix→retry feedback loop tying the checkpoints into a recovery sequence.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Under 50 lines with no external references needed and no bundle files present; the content is organized into clear, well-signaled sections (Overview, Core Principles, Expected Outcomes, Verification), which meets the rubric's simple-skill exception for a top score.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

67%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 solid, mostly concrete description that explicitly covers both what the skill does and when to use it within a distinct military-leadership niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term breadth: the keywords are relevant but somewhat formal and lack the natural synonyms users are likely to say.

Suggestions

Broaden the 'Use when' clause with natural user phrasings, e.g. 'Use when improving team morale, soldier welfare, or unit cohesion in a military leadership context'.

Add 1-2 more concrete behaviors to the action list (e.g. 'shares field conditions and rations') to push specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Consider a synonym such as 'troop cohesion' or 'unit morale' to reduce reliance on the more academic 'deep military loyalty'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (military loyalty/cohesion) and lists three concrete actions — 'Shares hardships, distributes rewards equitably, and leads by example' — matching the several-specific-actions anchor; not a 5 because the actions are somewhat broad rather than comprehensively enumerated.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Shares hardships, distributes rewards equitably, and leads by example') and when ('Use when building deep military loyalty and unit cohesion'); the 'when' is present and concrete but could expose more explicit trigger phrases to reach the 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords exist ('military loyalty', 'unit cohesion', 'leads by example') but the phrasing is fairly academic and misses common natural variations a user might say ('team morale', 'leadership', 'soldier welfare'), so it sits at the some-keywords-missing-synonyms anchor rather than the good-coverage anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The military-loyalty/unit-cohesion niche is clearly distinct with minimal conflict risk, but 'leads by example' and general welfare language create minor overlap with broad leadership/mentorship skills, placing it just below the minimal-conflict 5 anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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_208/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 13 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.